USPTO Examiner BLAUFELD JUSTIN R - Art Unit 2151

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18435607Method for Displaying Different Application Shortcuts on Different ScreensFebruary 2024December 2024Allow1010YesNo
18454715SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MEDIA CONTENT COMMUNICATIONAugust 2023October 2024Allow1410YesNo
18315163SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PARKING SPACE SELECTION AND NAVIGATION BASED ON WEIGHTED PARAMETER COMPARISONMay 2023March 2025Allow2220YesNo
18143331MEDIA CONTENT ITEM GENERATION FOR A CONTENT SHARING PLATFORMMay 2023November 2024Allow1930YesNo
18140756DEVICE NAVIGATIONAL MAPS FOR CONNECTED DEVICESApril 2023August 2024Allow1610YesNo
18178382SYSTEM FOR SUPERIMPOSED COMMUNICATION BY OBJECT ORIENTED RESOURCE MANIPULATION ON A DATA NETWORKMarch 2023March 2025Allow2500YesNo
18178453NOTIFICATION OPTIMIZATION SYSTEM AND SYSTEM MANAGEMENT SERVERMarch 2023January 2025Abandon2330YesNo
18174913Adaptive User Interface for Marine Electronic Device UsabilityFebruary 2023May 2025Abandon2640YesNo
18090179APPARATUSES, COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHODS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR IMPROVED SELECTION AND PROVISION OF OPERATIONAL SUPPORT DATA OBJECTSDecember 2022January 2025Allow2530YesNo
18067956HAND-MOVEMENT BASED INTERACTION WITH AUGMENTED REALITY OBJECTSDecember 2022April 2025Allow2830YesNo
18074661MENU FOR SELECTING A CAMERA SHOOTING MODE AMONG CAMERA SHOOTING MODESDecember 2022June 2025Abandon3060NoNo
17992435PAGE SWITCHING METHOD AND APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICENovember 2022January 2025Abandon3720NoNo
17986867PERSISTENT DISPLAY OF PRIORITIZED PARTICIPANTS WITH SHARED CONTENT OF COMMUNICATION SESSIONSNovember 2022June 2025Allow3110YesNo
17972429DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIRTUAL SCENE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMOctober 2022April 2025Allow2930YesNo
17953979CONFIGURING BROADCAST MEDIA QUALITY WITHIN A VIRTUAL CONFERENCING SYSTEMSeptember 2022August 2024Allow2340NoNo
17943411LIVE DEMONSTRATION ASSISTANCE PROVIDING MORE RELIABLE OUTPUTSeptember 2022May 2025Abandon3240YesNo
17883549MESSAGING FOR EVENT LIVE-STREAMAugust 2022September 2024Allow2640YesNo
17812147CARD-BASED INFORMATION MANAGEMENT METHOD AND SYSTEMJuly 2022July 2025Abandon3630YesYes
17860968System and Method for Learning User PreferencesJuly 2022March 2025Abandon3230NoNo
17806871LOCALIZATION FOR AUTONOMOUS MOVEMENT USING VEHICLE SENSORSJune 2022October 2024Allow2810YesNo
17744298APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING MOBILE APPLICATION USER ENGAGEMENTMay 2022June 2025Abandon3710NoNo
17706606REMOTE GESTURE CONTROL, INPUT MONITOR, SYSTEMS INCLUDING THE SAME, AND ASSOCIATED METHODSMarch 2022January 2025Abandon3440YesNo
17701890Selecting and Sharing ContentMarch 2022March 2025Allow3650YesNo
17762772Operation Method and Electronic Device for Displaying Content of an Application in an Accessible WindowMarch 2022June 2025Allow3940YesNo
17679647SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NAVIGATING CONTENTFebruary 2022January 2025Allow3560YesNo
17673888CONDITIONAL REGION-BASED COSTING IN CONTRACTION HIERARCHIESFebruary 2022February 2025Allow3620YesNo
17648673ROAD NETWORK MAPPING USING VEHICLE TELEMETRY DATAJanuary 2022February 2025Allow3720YesNo
17571277OPTIMIZED WEATHER AND THREAT DEPICTION BASED ON AIRCRAFT FLIGHT PLANJanuary 2022May 2025Allow4030YesNo
17454155Method and System for Supplementing and Providing Enhancements to Target Software Data EntriesNovember 2021September 2024Allow3440YesNo
17497169Shared Ride Hail Service Platform Gaming ExperienceOctober 2021December 2024Abandon3920YesNo
17403342WIRELESS HANDHELD AUDIO CAPTURE DEVICE AND MULTI-VOCALIST METHOD FOR AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA APPLICATIONAugust 2021August 2024Allow3630YesNo
17401348Hands-Free Crowd Sourced Indoor Navigation System and Method for Guiding Blind and Visually Impaired PersonsAugust 2021November 2024Abandon3911NoNo
17331169System and Method for Displaying and Analyzing Interface Variants for Concurrent Analysis by a UserMay 2021April 2025Abandon4660YesNo
17207536USER REACTION PREDICTION METHOD AND APPARATUSMarch 2021November 2024Allow4450YesNo
16705073REMOTELY CONTROLLING THE OUTPUT OF CONTENT ON A DEVICEDecember 2019February 2025Abandon6060YesNo
15971922METHOD FOR CREATING A MENU STRUCTURE ON A MEASURING TRANSDUCER, AND MEASURING TRANSDUCERMay 2018December 2024Abandon6080YesYes
13871362PRESENTING DATA TO ELECTRONIC MEETING PARTICIPANTSApril 2013October 2015Allow3020YesNo
13476831System And Method For Decorating A Hotel RoomMay 2012July 2015Allow3830YesYes
13466293PRESENTING DATA TO ELECTRONIC MEETING PARTICIPANTSMay 2012May 2015Allow3640YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
4.1%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
2.2%
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

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

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

Examiner BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R works in Art Unit 2151 and has examined 38 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 63.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 34 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R's allowance rate of 63.2% places them in the 16% 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 BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R receive 3.21 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 97% 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 BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 23% 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 +55.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BLAUFELD, JUSTIN R. This interview benefit is in the 96% 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, 16.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 8% 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 16.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 12% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 5% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 12% 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.

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 8.3% of allowed cases (in the 86% 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.