USPTO Examiner PARENT ALEXANDER RENE - Art Unit 1795

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18682345HIGH TEMPERATURE ELECTROLYSER SYSTEM OPTIMISED BY AN INTERMEDIATE CIRCUIT RECOVERY MODULEFebruary 2024October 2024Allow810YesNo
18558732FLOW ELECTRODE CAPACITIVE DEIONIZATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RECOVERING PHOSPHORUS IN PHOSPHOGYPSUM LEACHATE AND SYNCHRONOUS PERFORMING BRINE DESALINATIONNovember 2023April 2025Allow1700NoNo
18238462Chlor-alkali and Carbon Monoxide Electrolyzer IntegrationAugust 2023October 2024Allow1420YesYes
18237897Chlor-alkali and Carbon Monoxide Electrolyzer IntegrationAugust 2023December 2024Allow1630NoNo
18250775HIGH TEMPERATURE ELECTROLYSER SYSTEM OPTIMISED BY DEPRESSION OF THE STEAM SUPPLYApril 2023May 2025Allow2520NoNo
17789925ELECTROLYTIC SOLUTION GENERATION DEVICEJune 2022June 2025Allow3520NoNo
17835571ELECTROLYZER SYSTEM AND MATRIX CELL THEREFORJune 2022March 2025Allow3410NoNo
17830515ELECTROCHEMICAL SYSTEMJune 2022January 2025Allow3210NoNo
17728767MEMBRANELESS HYDROGEN ELECTROLYZER WITH STATIC ELECTROLYTEApril 2022April 2025Abandon3610NoNo
17708097PROCESS AND APPARATUS FOR THE ELECTRO-CHEMICAL TREATMENT OF WATER CONTAMINATED WITH EMERGING CONTAMINANTSMarch 2022April 2025Allow3711NoNo
17699339MEMBRANE-WAFER ASSEMBLY FOR ELECTRODEIONIZATIONMarch 2022April 2025Abandon3701NoNo
17692940ELECTROLYTIC REACTOR AND METHODS FOR THE ELECTROLYTIC TREATMENT OF FLUIDSMarch 2022July 2024Allow2811YesNo
17650436Process for preparing alkali metal alkoxides in a three-chamber electrolysis cellFebruary 2022February 2025Allow3610NoNo
17565643CONFIGURATION FOR ULTRA HIGH PRESSURE ELECTROLYTIC ELUENT GENERATORSDecember 2021November 2024Allow3410NoNo
17643836ELECTROCHEMICAL COMPRESSORDecember 2021November 2024Allow3510NoNo
17457427ELECTROCHEMICAL COMPRESSORDecember 2021October 2024Allow3410NoNo
17531774ROTARY TYPE CAPACITIVE DEIONIZATION APPARATUSNovember 2021October 2023Allow2310NoNo
17525419DEVICES FOR REMOVING METAL IONS FROM LIQUIDNovember 2021November 2024Abandon3620NoNo
17502711CARBON DIOXIDE UTILIZATION SYSTEMOctober 2021November 2024Abandon3710NoNo
17501264METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENTOctober 2021October 2024Allow3621NoNo
17469711CARBON DIOXIDE FIXATION METHOD AND CARBON DIOXIDE FIXATION SYSTEMSeptember 2021April 2025Allow4331YesNo
17462054METHOD FOR SELECTIVE SEPARATION OF MONOVALENT IONIC SPECIES USING ELECTRODES FUNCTIONALIZED WITH SULFONIC GROUPSAugust 2021April 2024Allow3220YesNo
17461478DIRECT ELECTROCHEMICAL REDUCTION METHOD FOR REMOVING SELENIUM FROM WASTEWATERAugust 2021November 2024Abandon3920NoNo
17400967WATER DEIONIZATION CELLS WITH FLOW CHANNELS PACKED WITH INTERCALATION MATERIALAugust 2021August 2024Allow3620NoNo
17400782WATER DEIONIZATION CELLSAugust 2021September 2024Allow3720NoNo
17389673HYBRID WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR RED TIDE REMOVAL AND PERCHLORATE CONTROL AND WATER TREATMENT METHOD USING THE SAMEJuly 2021November 2024Abandon3921YesNo
17387170MODULAR SYSTEM FOR HYDROGEN AND AMMONIA GENERATION WITHOUT DIRECT WATER INPUT FROM CENTRAL SOURCEJuly 2021June 2025Abandon4620NoNo
17367890METHOD FOR SYNTHESIZING AMMONIA USING METAL NANOPARTICLES IN A FUEL CELLJuly 2021April 2025Abandon4540YesNo
17415102Method for Converting Carbon Dioxide (CO2) into CO by an Electrolysis ReactionJune 2021March 2025Abandon4511NoNo
17414215Ion-Selective Separation by Shock ElectrodialysisJune 2021June 2025Allow4820NoNo
17284522ACIDIC TREATMENT LIQUID PROCESSING APPARATUS, ACIDIC TREATMENT LIQUID PROCESSING METHOD, SURFACE TREATMENT SYSTEM, AND SURFACE TREATMENT METHODApril 2021April 2025Allow4820YesNo
17277740NOVEL CONDUCTIVE MEMBRANE FILTRATION SYSTEM FOR DEGRADATION OF ORGANIC POLLUTANTS FROM WASTEWATERMarch 2021September 2024Abandon4210NoNo
17191842Electrokinetic-Based Concentrator Device and MethodMarch 2021September 2024Allow4311NoNo
17272007TARGET SPECIES RECOVERY AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODSFebruary 2021June 2025Allow5231YesNo
17272225SYSTEM AND PROCESS FOR DESALINATING MONOVALENT ANION SPECIES FROM WASTEWATERFebruary 2021April 2025Abandon5021NoNo
17271977METHOD FOR PREPARING A TITANIUM-ALUMINUM ALLOYFebruary 2021December 2024Abandon4620YesNo
17174552ELECTROCHEMICAL GRAPHENE EXFOLIATION WITH HYDROXIDE INTERCALATIONFebruary 2021November 2024Abandon4520NoNo
17262413BUBBLE EJECTION METHOD, POWER SUPPLY DEVICE, AND BUBBLE EJECTING APPARATUS (As Amended)January 2021January 2025Abandon4801NoNo
17259647Point-of-Care Electroflotation of Dispersed, Low Tolerance PathogensJanuary 2021January 2025Allow4811NoNo
17139813CONDUCTIVE POLYMER GRAFTED REUSABLE 3D PLATFORM FOR WATER RESTORATIONDecember 2020June 2024Abandon4101NoNo
16972160AN ELECTROLYTIC COMPOSITION AND CATHODE FOR THE NITROGEN REDUCTION REACTIONDecember 2020April 2024Allow4011YesNo
17053500PHOTOCATALYST ELECTRODE AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING PHOTOCATALYST ELECTRODENovember 2020April 2024Abandon4101NoNo
17046755PHOTOVOLTAIC-ELECTROCHEMICAL (PV-EC) SYSTEMOctober 2020May 2025Allow5621NoNo
17046283ELECTRODIALYSIS DEVICE FOR THE DESALINATION OF WATER FOR OIL AND GAS APPLICATIONSOctober 2020November 2024Allow4921NoNo
17043905PHOTOELECTROCHEMICAL (PEC) CELLSeptember 2020March 2024Abandon4201NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
95.9%
Higher than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

Filing a Notice of Appeal can sometimes lead to allowance even before the appeal is fully briefed or decided by the PTAB. This occurs when the examiner or their supervisor reconsiders the rejection during the mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) after the appeal is filed.

In this dataset, 100.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE works in Art Unit 1795 and has examined 44 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 61.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 39 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE's allowance rate of 61.4% places them in the 14% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE receive 1.48 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 35% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE is 39 months. This places the examiner in the 10% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +11.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PARENT, ALEXANDER RENE. This interview benefit is in the 49% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 40.9% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 91% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 27.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 29% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 87% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 40.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 38% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 7% percentile). This examiner rarely makes examiner's amendments compared to other examiners. You should expect to make all necessary claim amendments yourself through formal amendment practice.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 8% percentile). This examiner rarely issues Quayle actions compared to other examiners. Allowances typically come directly without a separate action for formal matters.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

Not Legal Advice: The information provided in this report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with a qualified patent attorney or agent for advice specific to your situation.

No Guarantees: We do not provide any guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the statistics presented above. Patent prosecution statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data and are subject to data quality limitations, processing errors, and changes in USPTO practices over time.

Limitation of Liability: Under no circumstances will IronCrow AI be liable for any outcome, decision, or action resulting from your reliance on the statistics, analysis, or recommendations presented in this report. Past prosecution patterns do not guarantee future results.

Use at Your Own Risk: While we strive to provide accurate and useful prosecution statistics, you should independently verify any information that is material to your prosecution strategy and use your professional judgment in all patent prosecution matters.