Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17139335 | IMAGE EDITING WITH AUDIO DATA | December 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 34 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17137767 | METHOD, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR PROMPTING IN EDITING VIDEO | December 2020 | September 2023 | Abandon | 32 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17132061 | GESTURE ANALYSIS FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES | December 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 41 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16942985 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECOGNIZING SIGN LANGUAGE OR GESTURE USING 3D EDM | July 2020 | June 2023 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16845826 | LOCKABLE WIDGETS ON A MOBILE DEVICE | April 2020 | August 2023 | Abandon | 40 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16784994 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR PROVIDING GRAPHIC DATA BASED ON VOICE AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF | February 2020 | September 2021 | Allow | 20 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16656450 | ADAPTIVE ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY TECHNIQUES FOR COMPUTING DEVICES | October 2019 | December 2023 | Abandon | 50 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16581808 | DISPLAY METHOD, SAMPLE ANALYZER, AND RECORDING MEDIUM | September 2019 | December 2024 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16085895 | EFFICIENT RESOURCE PROVIDER SYSTEM | September 2018 | February 2023 | Allow | 53 | 8 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12016383 | METHOD, APPARATUS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR PROVIDING A WORD INPUT MECHANISM | January 2008 | April 2014 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12009578 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAM FOR GENERATING CONTENT LISTS | January 2008 | April 2014 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11970571 | DETECTING PATTERNS OF ABUSE IN A VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT | January 2008 | December 2013 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11749254 | SYSTEM AND METHOD TO DISPLAY A WEB PAGE AS SCHEDULED BY A USER | May 2007 | January 2012 | Allow | 56 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11537119 | SPINNING OFF CHAT THREADS | September 2006 | March 2012 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10263217 | Analyzing User Viewership of Advertisements Appearing in a Screen Display in a User Terminal | October 2002 | February 2012 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RIEGLER, PATRICK F.
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.
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.
⚠ 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 RIEGLER, PATRICK F works in Art Unit 2171 and has examined 15 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 73.3%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.
Examiner RIEGLER, PATRICK F's allowance rate of 73.3% places them in the 39% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by RIEGLER, PATRICK F receive 4.40 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by RIEGLER, PATRICK F is 53 months. This places the examiner in the 5% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +31.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RIEGLER, PATRICK F. This interview benefit is in the 79% 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, 16.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 16% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 14.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 16% 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.
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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 2% 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'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 14% 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.