USPTO Examiner CHOWDHURY SUBIR KUMAR - Art Unit 2132

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18816756PADDING DATA FOR A NON-VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICEAugust 2024March 2026Allow1910YesNo
18544144BUFFERING DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFDecember 2023September 2025Allow2120NoNo
18534192STORAGE DEVICE, OPERATION METHOD OF STORAGE DEVICE, AND OPERATION METHOD OF HOST DEVICEDecember 2023July 2025Allow2020YesNo
18530915SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DATA SERVER CHANGE MANAGEMENTDecember 2023August 2025Abandon2010NoNo
18530074Universal Flash Storage Shared Write Booster Buffer EnhancementsDecember 2023November 2025Abandon2420NoNo
18522403METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DEALLOCATING DYNAMICALLY ALLOCATED MEMORY AREANovember 2023March 2025Allow1610NoNo
18513198STRUCTURED DATA FILTERING IN MEMORY DEVICESNovember 2023September 2025Allow2220YesNo
18510608SERVICE LIFETIME MONITORING AND EARLY WARNING METHOD, MEMORY STORAGE DEVICE AND MEMORY CONTROL CIRCUIT UNITNovember 2023August 2025Allow2130NoNo
18502147SOLID-STATE DISKS WEAR LEVELING WITH PREDICTIVE MIGRATION OF DATA DEVICES IN A RAID CONTAINER SYSTEMNovember 2023August 2025Allow2150YesNo
18488426Write Protect HW AccelerationOctober 2023June 2025Allow2020YesNo
18461261SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INDEXING A DATA ITEM IN A DATA STORAGE SYSTEMSeptember 2023July 2025Allow2220NoNo
18238301STORAGE DEVICE INCLUDING NONVOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE AND OPERATING METHOD OF STORAGE DEVICEAugust 2023March 2026Allow3040YesNo
18237033EFFICIENT USAGE OF REDUNDANT COLUMNS IN FLASH MEMORYAugust 2023January 2026Allow2920YesYes
18235678NON-VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE AND STORAGE DEVICEAugust 2023September 2025Allow2530YesNo
18364277UNMAPPING A WRITE BUFFER PORTION FOR ACCESS DURING A WRITE TO A MEMORY DEVICEAugust 2023October 2025Allow2640NoNo
18273230Shared Drive Storage Stack Monitoring And Recovery Method And SystemJuly 2023June 2025Allow2330NoNo
18310800OPTIMIZING INPUT/OUTPUT OPERATIONS PER SECTION OF REMOTE PERSISTENT STORAGEMay 2023April 2025Allow2320YesNo
18140492Backend Replication of Data in a Distributed Storage SystemApril 2023July 2025Abandon2720YesNo
18134359OPERATING METHOD OF MEMORY DEVICE FOR MANAGING MAP DATA OF EACH OF PLURALITY OF STORAGE DEVICES, COMPUTING SYSTEM INCLUDING MEMORY DEVICE, AND OPERATING METHOD OF COMPUTING SYSTEMApril 2023August 2025Allow2840YesNo
18193921DATA REGENERATION AND STORAGE IN A RAID STORAGE SYSTEMMarch 2023March 2025Allow2320NoNo
17875198DATA STREAMING ACCELERATORJuly 2022September 2025Abandon3820NoNo
17711928SCALABLE ACCESS CONTROL CHECKING FOR CROSS-ADDRESS-SPACE DATA MOVEMENTApril 2022July 2025Allow3920NoNo
17484634GRAPHICS PROCESSOR MEMORY ACCESS ARCHITECTURE WITH ADDRESS SORTINGSeptember 2021January 2026Allow5230YesNo

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 CHOWDHURY, SUBIR KUMAR - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner CHOWDHURY, SUBIR KUMAR works in Art Unit 2132 and has examined 1 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 52 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner CHOWDHURY, SUBIR KUMAR's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 94% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by CHOWDHURY, SUBIR KUMAR receive 3.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 86% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by CHOWDHURY, SUBIR KUMAR is 52 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 10% 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 10% 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:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • 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.
  • 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.