Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18951159 | CALIBRATED LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS FOR MULTI-LABEL CLASSIFICATIONS | November 2024 | April 2025 | Allow | 5 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18584048 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RE-REGISTERING PRE-REGISTERED IDENTITY INFORMATION IN NEW IDENTITY RECOGNITION SYSTEM | February 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 16 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18572808 | SECURE EQUI-JOIN APPARATUS, SECURE EQUI-JOIN METHOD, AND PROGRAM | December 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18561937 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND PROGRAM | November 2023 | October 2025 | Abandon | 23 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18238584 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATIC INGESTION OF DATA USING A RATE-LIMITED APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACE | August 2023 | August 2024 | Abandon | 12 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18362899 | GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE FOR A MATCHING TOOL | July 2023 | January 2025 | Allow | 17 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18221684 | SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES FOR TAXONOMY-BASED CLASSIFICATION OF UNLABELED STRUCTURED DATASETS | July 2023 | December 2024 | Allow | 17 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18332222 | SYSTEM, APPARATUS, AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATICALLY MAINTAINING DATAQUALITY BY CALIBRATING A THRESHOLD FOR A DEFINED METRIC ACCORDINGTO A CONVOLUTED MOVING AVERAGE MODEL | June 2023 | January 2025 | Abandon | 19 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18108659 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATIC PROFILE SEGMENTATION USING SMALL TEXT VARIATIONS | February 2023 | August 2023 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17971993 | GRAPH DATABASE QUERY PAGINATION | October 2022 | December 2023 | Abandon | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17958980 | ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING DATABASE EXTRACTION, TRANSFORMATION, AND ANALYSIS | October 2022 | June 2025 | Allow | 33 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17915267 | DATA MIGRATION | September 2022 | September 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17952063 | DATA ENRICHMENT AND MATCHING | September 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 31 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17874884 | Preserving Enterprise Artifacts Using Digital Twin Technology And Intelligent Smart Contracts | July 2022 | February 2025 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17835909 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENTERPRISE PROCESS CONSTRUCTION | June 2022 | December 2023 | Abandon | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17661594 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF FILTERING TOPICS USING PARTS OF SPEECH TAGGING | May 2022 | September 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17721248 | DYNAMIC RESOLUTION ESTIMATION IN METRIC TIME SERIES DATA | April 2022 | February 2024 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17648322 | COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY FOR PERFORMING DATA TRANSFORMATION USING VISUALIZATION DIAGRAMS | January 2022 | May 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17563288 | Parallel Stream Processing of Change Data Capture | December 2021 | May 2024 | Allow | 28 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17614418 | DATA PROCESSING METHOD, PLATFORM, COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE | November 2021 | January 2024 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17455899 | MACHINE LEARNING INTERMITTENT DATA DROPOUT MITIGATION | November 2021 | November 2023 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17503530 | STORAGE STRUCTURE OF DATA OBJECT, METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR STORING AND DYNAMICALLY MANAGING DATA OBJECT ON COMPUTER, AND STORAGE MEDIUM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE | October 2021 | June 2024 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17449752 | DATA ANNOTATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM | October 2021 | January 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17394146 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPARING AND SELECTIVELY MERGING DATABASE RECORDS | August 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 42 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17444395 | VARIABLE DENSITY-BASED CLUSTERING ON DATA STREAMS | August 2021 | December 2022 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17360250 | ON-DEVICE GENERATION AND PERSONALIZATION OF ZERO-PREFIX SUGGESTION(S) AND USE THEREOF | June 2021 | September 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17330046 | EFFICIENT, IN-MEMORY, RELATIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR HETEROGENEOUS GRAPHS | May 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 46 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17173342 | REDUCING CHARACTER SET CONVERSION | February 2021 | August 2023 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17166894 | DETERMINING A COLLECTION OF DATA VISUALIZATIONS | February 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 50 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17153712 | DATABASE STREAMING FOR AUTOMATED PROCESSES | January 2021 | November 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17252853 | Pipeline Data Processing | December 2020 | March 2023 | Abandon | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17096166 | BUILT-IN ANALYTICS FOR DATABASE MANAGEMENT | November 2020 | November 2023 | Allow | 36 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17023283 | EFFICIENT RETRIEVAL OF TOP SIMILARITY REPRESENTATIONS | September 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 45 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16938807 | OPTIMIZED STORAGE OF METADATA SEPARATE FROM TIME SERIES DATA | July 2020 | January 2025 | Allow | 54 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16730950 | DATA CONTENT GOVERNANCE FOR PRESENTATION LAYER SYNCHRONIZATION FOR A VERSION CONTROLLED UNDERLYING DATA MODEL | December 2019 | June 2023 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16398499 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTINUOUS DATA PROTECTION | April 2019 | May 2022 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16345443 | SEMANTIC SEARCH AND RULE METHODS FOR A DISTRIBUTED DATA SYSTEM | April 2019 | December 2022 | Allow | 43 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16301673 | SMART TRENDER FOR INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEMS | November 2018 | December 2023 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15645093 | WORKER THREAD PROCESSING | July 2017 | March 2023 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner CURRAN, J MITCHELL.
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.
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.
✓ 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 CURRAN, J MITCHELL works in Art Unit 2161 and has examined 21 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 76.2%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 42 months.
Examiner CURRAN, J MITCHELL's allowance rate of 76.2% places them in the 42% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by CURRAN, J MITCHELL receive 3.43 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 93% 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by CURRAN, J MITCHELL is 42 months. This places the examiner in the 18% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +63.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CURRAN, J MITCHELL. This interview benefit is in the 97% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 25.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 40% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 5.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 6% 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.
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 6% 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 48% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 133.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 96% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 11% 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 12% percentile). This examiner rarely issues Quayle actions compared to other examiners. Allowances typically come directly without a separate action for formal matters.
Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:
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.