USPTO Examiner CHAKI KAKALI - Art Unit 2122

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17104003INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, NEURAL NETWORK COMPUTATION PROGRAM, AND NEURAL NETWORK COMPUTATION METHODNovember 2020August 2024Abandon4510NoNo
17102722INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODNovember 2020April 2024Abandon4010NoNo
16987021IOT GATEWAY FOR CONTROLLING DATA REPORTING INTERVAL OF IOT TERMINAL BASED ON DATA PREDICTION ACCURACY AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOFAugust 2020April 2024Abandon4410NoNo
16935323SYSTEM FOR COGNITIVE RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION USING SWARM INTELLIGENCEJuly 2020April 2024Abandon4430NoNo
16932043DEVICE AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING A DIGITAL DATA STREAMJuly 2020November 2023Abandon4020NoNo
16627293CALCULATION METHOD AND CALCULATION DEVICE FOR SPARSE NEURAL NETWORK, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTDecember 2019September 2021Abandon2020NoNo
16366841USER CLASSIFICATION USING A DEEP FOREST NETWORKMarch 2019December 2019Allow910YesNo
16362186DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND DATA PROCESSING DEVICEMarch 2019November 2019Abandon800NoNo
16262985METHOD FOR OPTIMIZING HYPERPARAMETERS OF AUTO-LABELING DEVICE WHICH AUTO-LABELS TRAINING IMAGES FOR USE IN DEEP LEARNING NETWORK TO ANALYZE IMAGES WITH HIGH PRECISION, AND OPTIMIZING DEVICE USING THE SAMEJanuary 2019April 2020Allow1520YesNo
16163375DATA ANALYTICS PLATFORMOctober 2018June 2020Abandon2000NoNo
15916951TIME SERIES DATA ANALYSIS DEVICE, TIME SERIES DATA ANALYSIS METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAMMarch 2018February 2019Abandon1100NoNo
15835261NEURAL NETWORK COMBINED IMAGE AND TEXT EVALUATOR AND CLASSIFIERDecember 2017March 2022Abandon5140YesNo
15579240METHOD AND DEVICE OF CONSTRUCTING DECISION MODEL, COMPUTER DEVICE AND STORAGE APPARATUSDecember 2017August 2020Abandon3220NoNo
15820906SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TRAINING NEURAL NETWORKSNovember 2017November 2018Abandon1200NoNo
15633681GRINDING MACHINEJune 2017June 2019Allow2400NoNo
15617795IDENTIFICATION OF DECISION BIAS WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMJune 2017November 2021Abandon5310NoNo
15489234MULTIFACTOR VENUE LOCALIZATION USING CENTRALIZED LEARNINGApril 2017July 2020Abandon3910YesNo
15483859GENERATION AND USE OF MODEL PARAMETERS IN COLD-START SCENARIOSApril 2017March 2020Allow3510YesNo
15455259System and Method for Training Parameter Set in Neural NetworkMarch 2017March 2018Abandon1200NoNo
15451553SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING ACCURACY OF CLASSIFICATION-BASED TEXT DATA PROCESSINGMarch 2017November 2020Abandon4410NoNo
15452449NEURAL NETWORK COMPRESSION VIA WEAK SUPERVISIONMarch 2017September 2020Abandon4310NoNo
15403107SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CAPTIONING CONTENTJanuary 2017March 2020Abandon3910NoNo
15389755A Method for Effluent Total Nitrogen-based on a Recurrent Self-organizing RBF Neural NetworkDecember 2016January 2020Allow3610NoNo
15388899SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DEPLOYING CUSTOMIZED MACHINE LEARNING SERVICESDecember 2016February 2020Abandon3810NoNo
15386996LEARNING METHOD FOR SYNAPSES OF A NEUROMORPHIC DEVICEDecember 2016December 2020Abandon4720NoNo
15363519SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATICALLY UPDATING INFERENCE MODELSNovember 2016March 2020Abandon4020NoNo
15352318OPTIMIZED MACHINE LEARNING SYSTEMNovember 2016December 2020Abandon4920NoNo
15347638LEARNING SYSTEM, LEARNING PROGRAM, AND LEARNING METHODNovember 2016November 2019Abandon3610NoNo
15343184SYSTEM AND METHOD OF WRITING COMPUTER PROGRAMSNovember 2016February 2018Abandon1600NoNo
15254958Modeling of Geospatial Location Over TimeSeptember 2016July 2019Abandon3410NoNo
15248497RECOMMENDING METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICEAugust 2016August 2017Abandon1200NoNo
15225545TARGET VARIABLE DISTRIBUTION-BASED ACCEPTANCE OF MACHINE LEARNING TEST DATA SETSAugust 2016March 2020Allow4320NoNo
15211422OPERATIONAL PARAMETER VALUE LEARNING DEVICE, OPERATIONAL PARAMETER VALUE LEARNING METHOD, AND CONTROLLER FOR LEARNING DEVICEJuly 2016February 2019Abandon3100NoNo
15204984Method of Adaptively Predicting Blood-Glucose Level by Collecting Biometric and Activity Data with A User Portable DeviceJuly 2016September 2019Abandon3810NoNo
14999338Method for a system that discovers, locates, indexes, ranks, and clusters multimedia service providers using hierarchical communication topologiesApril 2016March 2018Abandon5820YesNo
14984216SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EFFICIENTLY CLASSIFYING DATA OBJECTSDecember 2015March 2020Allow5020YesNo
14971769APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE DATA ANALYSISDecember 2015June 2016Abandon600NoNo
14969755METHOD OF CONDITIONALLY PROMPTING WEARABLE SENSOR USERS FOR ACTIVITY CONTEXT IN THE PRESENCE OF SENSOR ANOMALIESDecember 2015September 2019Abandon4510NoNo
14970279DRIVING BEHAVIOR EVALUATING METHOD AND DEVICEDecember 2015May 2018Abandon2900NoNo
14540683CONTEXT REASONING APPARATUS, CONTEXT RECOGNITION SYSTEM AND CONTEXT REASONING METHODNovember 2014March 2016Abandon1600NoNo
14495094FACILITATING DYNAMIC AFFECT-BASED ADAPTIVE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING OF USER BEHAVIOR ON COMPUTING DEVICESSeptember 2014February 2020Abandon6040YesNo
14332968METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PREDICTING POWER CONSUMPTIONJuly 2014February 2016Abandon1900NoNo
13924209CORRECTING INFERRED KNOWLEDGE FOR EXPIRED EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGEJune 2013February 2016Abandon3210NoNo
13815960Monitoring I/O, prompts, and collaborations of data, content, and correlations for evaluating, predicting, and ascertaining metrics for creativity, novelty, utility, consumption, reliability, success, values, rights, IP, and ROIMarch 2013March 2014Abandon1200NoNo
13534493COMPUTER HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE DIAGNOSTIC AND REPORT SYSTEMJune 2012October 2018Abandon6060YesNo
13293983SYSTEM, METHOD AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR DYNAMICALLY MEASURING PROPERTIES OF OBJECTS RENDERED AND/OR REFERENCED BY AN APPLICATION EXECUTING ON A COMPUTING DEVICENovember 2011July 2013Abandon2010NoNo
13254925LEARNING APPARATUS, IDENTIFYING APPARATUS AND METHOD THEREFOROctober 2011May 2014Abandon3310NoNo
13188122Knowledge Reasoning Method of Boolean Satisfiability (SAT)July 2011May 2014Abandon3410NoNo
13036151DIGITAL WEIGHT LOSS AIDFebruary 2011May 2014Abandon3910NoNo
12960923Electronic Communications TriageDecember 2010June 2012Abandon1900NoNo
12525551STIMULI BASED INTELLIGENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEMDecember 2009July 2013Abandon4710NoNo
12587174System and method for the graphical presentation of the content of radiologic image study reportsOctober 2009November 2012Abandon3810NoNo
12350418POWER SUPPLY CONTROL SYSTEM, POWER SUPPLY CONTROL DEVICE, CONTROL TERMINAL, POWER SUPPLY CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAMJanuary 2009November 2011Abandon3410NoNo
12260511SENSOR UNIT FOR ENVIRONMENT OBSERVATION COMPRISING A NEURAL PROCESSOROctober 2008April 2012Abandon4210NoNo
09771482METHOD FOR REMOVING DEPENDENT STORE-LOAD PAIR FROM CRITICAL PATHJanuary 2001July 2002Allow1810NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner CHAKI, KAKALI - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner CHAKI, KAKALI works in Art Unit 2122 and has examined 55 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 14.5%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 36 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner CHAKI, KAKALI's allowance rate of 14.5% places them in the 2% 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 CHAKI, KAKALI receive 1.15 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 11% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by CHAKI, KAKALI is 36 months. This places the examiner in the 35% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +35.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CHAKI, KAKALI. This interview benefit is in the 83% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 14.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 12% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 25.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 35% 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, 60.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 61% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 9% 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 25.0% of allowed cases (in the 96% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

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.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.

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.