USPTO Examiner VO TIM T - Art Unit 2138

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18781377ELECTRONIC APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHODJuly 2024October 2025Allow1510NoNo
18754229APPARATUS FOR CONNECTING A FIELD DEVICE TO A CONTROL SYSTEMJune 2024January 2026Allow1810NoNo
18676764INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM DONGLE WITH ORTHOGONAL RADIATING ANTENNAMay 2024March 2026Allow2120NoNo
18664586MEMORY TRANSACTION PARAMETER SETTINGSMay 2024December 2025Allow2010NoNo
18639192PROCESSING METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICEApril 2024October 2025Allow1810NoNo
18630864BATTERY CLUSTER CONTROLApril 2024October 2025Allow1810NoNo
18415884CONNECTION CIRCUIT FOR MEMORY ACCESSESJanuary 2024October 2025Allow2110NoNo
18461997STORAGE SYSTEM INCLUDING STORAGE NODES EACH INCLUDING A STORAGE CONTROLLER CONFIGURED TO RUN ON A PROCESSORSeptember 2023July 2025Allow2310NoNo
18349155Quantum Information System and Method with Entanglement Tracking and Generation of Verified Quantum Information Using MetadataJuly 2023March 2024Allow800NoNo
18199582MALWARE-RESISTANT COMPUTER SYSTEM MEMORY CAPTUREMay 2023March 2026Allow3420NoNo
18153084ELECTRONIC DATA FILE ACCESS MANAGEMENT IN A DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEMJanuary 2023April 2024Allow1500NoNo
18151470MEMORY MANAGEMENT METHOD, MEMORY STORAGE DEVICE AND MEMORY CONTROL CIRCUIT UNITJanuary 2023April 2024Allow1500NoNo
18003689DEVICE AND METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING LIVE MIGRATIONDecember 2022March 2024Allow1500NoNo
18087464MEMORY DEVICE, MEMORY SYSTEM INCLUDING THE SAME, AND OPERATING METHOD OF THE MEMORY SYSTEMDecember 2022January 2024Allow1300NoNo
17992177MEMORY DEVICE AND PROGRAM OPERATION THEREOFNovember 2022January 2024Allow2500NoNo
17991382NFT SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND STRUCTURES FOR MULTIPLATFORM GAMING CONTENTNovember 2022January 2024Allow2500NoNo
17981783SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SHALLOW COPYNovember 2022March 2024Allow1700NoNo
17940598MANAGED FETCHING AND EXECUTION OF COMMANDS FROM SUBMISSION QUEUESSeptember 2022August 2025Allow3620NoNo
17894591MULTIMEDIA CARD COMMAND TIMEOUT MEASUREMENTAugust 2022January 2024Allow1700NoNo
17884699SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING CORESIDENT DATA FOR CONTAINERSAugust 2022March 2024Allow1910NoNo
17879713SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PRE-POPULATING ADDRESS TRANSLATION CACHEAugust 2022March 2024Allow1910YesNo
17872744SMART PREFETCHING FOR REMOTE MEMORYJuly 2022January 2024Allow1800NoNo
17747410ON-DEMAND ACTIVATION OF MEMORY PATH DURING SLEEP OR ACTIVE MODESMay 2022August 2022Allow300NoNo
17659732SHARING CLOUD DATA WITH AN APPLICATIONApril 2022September 2022Allow510NoNo
17704553MEMORY TUNNELING INTERFACEMarch 2022September 2025Allow4221NoNo
17686854CRYPTOGRAPHIC SEPARATION OF MMIO ON DEVICEMarch 2022June 2023Allow1500YesNo
17516833IDENTIFYING AND PREVENTING INVALID MEMORY ACCESSNovember 2021September 2022Allow1100NoNo
17511299POINTER DEREFERENCING WITHIN MEMORY SUB-SYSTEMOctober 2021September 2022Allow1100NoNo
17478993STORAGE SYSTEM, STORAGE CONTROL DEVICE, AND STORAGE CONTROL METHODSeptember 2021December 2024Abandon3910NoNo
17323777Multi-Ring Shared, Traversable, and Dynamic Advanced DatabaseMay 2021September 2022Allow1610NoNo
17246954SYSTEMS AND METHODS IN A GRAPHICS ENVIRONMENT FOR PROVIDING SHARED VIRTUAL MEMORY ADDRESSING SUPPORT FOR A HOST SYSTEMMay 2021September 2022Allow1610YesNo
17246042INLINE ENCRYPTION/DECRYPTION FOR A MEMORY CONTROLLERApril 2021September 2022Allow1710NoNo
17240908CACHE MANAGEMENT BASED ON TYPES OF I/O OPERATIONSApril 2021August 2022Allow1610YesNo
17236444BUDGETING OPEN BLOCKS BASED ON POWER LOSS PROTECTIONApril 2021February 2023Allow2200YesNo
17213841Data Management Method and Apparatus, and ServerMarch 2021March 2022Allow1200NoNo
17211544USING A COMMON POOL OF BLOCKS FOR USER DATA AND A SYSTEM DATA STRUCTUREMarch 2021July 2022Allow1510NoNo
17207436MANAGING CAPACITY REDUCTION WHEN DOWNSHIFTING MULTI-LEVEL MEMORY CELLSMarch 2021May 2022Allow1410NoNo
17183754STORING PREDICTION ENTRIES AND STREAM ENTRIES WHERE EACH STREAM ENTRY INCLUDES A STREAM IDENTIFIER AND A PLURALITY OF SEQUENTIAL WAY PREDICTIONSFebruary 2021March 2022Allow1300NoNo
17174869STORAGE DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAMEFebruary 2021October 2022Allow2010NoNo
17167109METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING PIPELINE-BASED ACCESSING MANAGEMENT IN STORAGE SERVER WITH AID OF CACHING METADATA WITH HARDWARE PIPELINE MODULE DURING PROCESSING OBJECT WRITE COMMANDFebruary 2021June 2022Allow1610NoNo
17153068VALID DATA AWARE MEDIA RELIABILITY SCANNING FOR MEMORY SUB-BLOCKSJanuary 2021May 2022Allow1600YesNo
17152544Framed Event Access in an Ordered Event Stream Storage SystemJanuary 2021August 2022Allow1900NoNo
17152279RESTORATION OF WARM AND COLD DATA BLOCKS BASED ON STORAGE TIME BY BATCHESJanuary 2021April 2022Allow1500NoNo
17133944INSPECTION SYSTEM, METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM FOR PROHIBITING ACCESS VIOLATIONDecember 2020October 2023Abandon3440NoNo
17089324METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR OPTIMIZED TRANSLATION OF A VIRTUAL ADDRESS HAVING MULTIPLE VIRTUAL ADDRESS PORTIONS USING MULTIPLE TRANSLATION LOOKASIDE BUFFER (TLB) ARRAYS FOR VARIABLE PAGE SIZESNovember 2020May 2022Allow1910NoNo
17006117DATA STORAGE APPARATUS FOR THERMAL THROTTLING AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOFAugust 2020May 2022Allow2110YesNo
17000066ADJUSTABLE PHYSICAL OR LOGICAL CAPACITY CRITERIA FOR WRITE CACHE REPLENISHMENT BASED ON TEMPERATURE OR PROGRAM ERASE CYCLES OF THE MEMORY DEVICEAugust 2020June 2022Allow2110NoNo
16937219MEMORY SYSTEM WITH MEMORY CONTROLLER MANAGING AN ACCUMULATED ERASE COUNT VALUE AND AN OPEN BLOCK ERASE COUNT VALUE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAMEJuly 2020May 2022Allow2210NoNo
16918521STORAGE DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FOGGY AND FINE PROGRAMMINGJuly 2020June 2023Allow3540YesNo
16916926TRANSFERRING DATA BETWEEN CLOCK DOMAINS USING PULSES ACROSS A QUEUEJune 2020May 2022Allow2320YesNo
16836454Flow Control of Large Sequential Host Read Commands Based on a Queue ThresholdMarch 2020March 2022Allow2310YesNo
16783955METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ENHANCING IOPS OF A HARD DISK DRIVE SYSTEM BASED ON STORING METADATA IN HOST VOLATILE MEMORY AND DATA IN NON-VOLATILE MEMORY USING A SHARED CONTROLLERFebruary 2020February 2022Allow2510YesNo
16720683APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR SHARING A DATA ATTRIBUTE FROM A MEMORY SYSTEM, A DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM OR A NETWORK SERVERDecember 2019September 2022Abandon3320YesNo
16708090TRANSPARENT DRIVE-TO-DRIVE COPYINGDecember 2019May 2023Allow4140YesNo
16691783DATA CACHE METHOD APPLIED TO DISPLAY DRIVER OF MOBILE DEVICENovember 2019November 2021Abandon2410NoNo
16683502ROLLBACK PROCEDURE FOR FAILED DATASET IMAGE OPERATIONNovember 2019May 2023Allow4240YesNo
16410163DATA STORAGE APPARATUS AND SYSTEM INFORMATION PROGRAMMING METHOD THEREFORMay 2019January 2023Abandon4460NoNo
16204811WEAR LEVELING FOR NON-VOLATILE MEMORY USING DATA WRITE COUNTERSNovember 2018June 2023Allow5470YesNo
16123249UTILIZING SPARE NETWORK NODES FOR DEDUPLICATION FINGERPRINTS DATABASESeptember 2018June 2023Allow5780YesNo
15937146SPECIFYING MEDIA TYPE IN WRITE COMMANDSMarch 2018March 2023Allow6060YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner VO, TIM T.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
92.5%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.

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
96.2%
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

Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.

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

Examiner VO, TIM T - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner VO, TIM T works in Art Unit 2138 and has examined 34 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 85.3%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 21 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner VO, TIM T's allowance rate of 85.3% places them in the 62% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by VO, TIM T receive 1.85 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 43% 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 VO, TIM T is 21 months. This places the examiner in the 91% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +14.4% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by VO, TIM T. This interview benefit is in the 53% 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, 17.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 15% 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 6.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 7% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 16% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.

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 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 20.7% of allowed cases (in the 93% 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:

  • 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.

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.