USPTO Examiner OKASHA RAMI RAFAT - Art Unit 2118

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18761232In-Application User Interface MessagingJuly 2024February 2025Allow700YesNo
18663378PROVIDING CONTEXTUAL ACTIONS IN COMMAND LINE INTERFACESMay 2024March 2025Allow1000YesNo
18390849INITIALIZING A CONVERSATION WITH AN AUTOMATED AGENT VIA SELECTABLE GRAPHICAL ELEMENTDecember 2023June 2025Allow1820YesNo
18542146CREATING DYNAMIC DATA-BOUND CONTAINER HOSTED VIEWS AND EDITABLE FORMSDecember 2023January 2025Allow1310NoNo
18534300ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFORDecember 2023June 2025Allow1820YesNo
18377667Intellectual-Property Landscaping Platform with Interactive Graphical ElementOctober 2023November 2024Allow1410NoNo
18230803METHOD OF ADJUSTING VIRTUAL KEYBOARDS AND INTERFACES BASED ON USER HEIGHTAugust 2023July 2024Allow1220YesNo
18082750CREATING NEW WORKLOADS FOR LAUNCH WIZARDSDecember 2022January 2025Allow2510YesNo
17980020SECURE, COLLABORATIVE, DIGITAL CLIPBOARDNovember 2022February 2025Abandon2730NoYes
17943197MULTIMEDIA REDIRECTION IN COLLABORATIVE SESSIONS ON VIRTUAL DESKTOPSSeptember 2022September 2024Allow2420NoNo
17820745SYSTEM AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING DEVICES USING MOTION GESTURESAugust 2022February 2025Allow3030YesNo
17885384TRANSFERABLE REAL-TIME CLOCK FOR ROBOTICS CONTROLAugust 2022February 2025Allow3110YesNo
17877568Dynamically Morphing Virtual Assistant Avatars for Assistant SystemsJuly 2022December 2024Allow2850YesNo
17816072Method For Automatically Generating An Electronic Card Book From A Physical Card Book Having Scannable CodeJuly 2022October 2024Allow2610NoNo
17869041LAUNDRY APPLIANCES WITH CUSTOMIZED FEATURESJuly 2022March 2025Allow3210NoNo
17742995MONITORING AND DETECTING ERRORS BY LOCATION AND COMMON DEPENDENCY WITHIN A COMPLEX DIGITAL ECOSYSTEMMay 2022August 2024Allow2720YesNo
17774546OPERATION METHOD AND OPERATION SYSTEM FOR OPERATING PRODUCTION FACILITIES OF A SAME KINDMay 2022December 2024Allow3210YesNo
17736549PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM INCLUDING PROCESS CONDITION DETERMINATION USING ATTRIBUTE-RELATIVE PROCESS CONDITIONMay 2022January 2025Allow3200NoNo
17660965FINGERSPELLING TEXT ENTRYApril 2022March 2024Allow2330NoNo
17730007VERSATILE ANOMALY DETECTION SYSTEM FOR INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMSApril 2022May 2025Allow3610YesNo
17708480INTER-PLATFORM CONTROL INTERFACEMarch 2022March 2025Allow3510NoNo
17761867Device Capability Scheduling Method and Electronic DeviceMarch 2022June 2025Allow3910NoNo
17650701SHOE MAKING ASSISTANCE APPARATUSFebruary 2022April 2025Abandon3810NoNo
17627863METHOD AND CONTROL DEVICE FOR OPERATING A CONVERTER-BASED GRID UNITJanuary 2022August 2024Allow3110NoNo
17620374COMPUTER-ASSISTED CONFIGURATION OF A TECHNICAL SYSTEM INCLUDING A SEQUENCE OF SYSTEM COMPONENTS THAT IS ASSIGNABLE TO A SEQUENCE PATTERNDecember 2021November 2024Allow3510NoNo
17612434QUANTITATIVE DIAGNOSTIC METHOD FOR QUALITY OF MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENTNovember 2021September 2024Allow3410YesNo
17524762VARIABLE-STEP-DISTANCE MICRO-MILLING REPAIR CUTTER PATH GENERATING METHOD FOR DAMAGE POINTS ON SURFACE OF OPTICAL CRYSTALNovember 2021September 2024Allow3410NoNo
17598786METHOD FOR PLANTATION TREATMENT OF A PLANTATION FIELDSeptember 2021May 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17481254ELECTRICAL DEVICE AND SYSTEM FOR HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLESeptember 2021December 2024Allow3920YesNo
17378205PHASOR IDENTIFICATION VIA SYNCHRONOUS MESSAGINGJuly 2021August 2024Allow3720YesNo
17265051SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING A ROBOTIC MANIPULATOR OR ASSOCIATED TOOLFebruary 2021February 2025Allow4830YesNo
16952562OFFLINE STRUCTURED DATA NAVIGATION ON A MOBILE DEVICENovember 2020November 2024Allow4840YesNo
17067327Method, System and Apparatus for Contactless Clock-In and Clock-OutOctober 2020November 2024Abandon4920YesNo
16919388AGENT ENVIRONMENT CO-CREATION USING REINFORCEMENT LEARNINGJuly 2020November 2024Allow5330YesNo
16628546FORM AUTHORITY GRANTING METHOD BASED ON TIME PROPERTY FIELDS OF FORMJanuary 2020December 2024Allow5940NoNo
15267224USER INTERFACE FOR SEARCHING A LARGE DATA SETSeptember 2016September 2019Allow3620YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
1.8%
Lower 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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT works in Art Unit 2118 and has examined 34 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 88.2%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 32 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT's allowance rate of 88.2% places them in the 65% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT receive 1.85 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 58% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT is 32 months. This places the examiner in the 31% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +13.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by OKASHA, RAMI RAFAT. This interview benefit is in the 54% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 40.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 90% 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 37.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 49% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 1% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 8% 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:

  • 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.

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.