USPTO Examiner BELOUSOV ANDREY - Art Unit 2172

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18957773METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING A MODIFIED GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE USING AN OPTIMIZATION PROTOCOLNovember 2024February 2025Allow300NoNo
18778317METHOD, APPARATUS, TERMINAL DEVICE AND MEDIUM FOR OBJECT PROCESSINGJuly 2024May 2025Allow1020NoNo
18432752USER INTERFACE DISPLAY METHOD AND APPARATUS THEREFORFebruary 2024August 2024Allow700NoNo
18430806Finger Orientation Touch DetectionFebruary 2024March 2025Allow1410NoNo
18456442USER INTERFACES FOR MESSAGESAugust 2023March 2025Allow1900NoNo
18451610SCREEN RECORDING METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMAugust 2023June 2025Allow2210NoNo
18362785ACTIVE AGREEMENT COMPONENTSJuly 2023January 2025Allow1810YesNo
18357907APPLICATION DATA DISPLAYED THROUGH A SELECTABLE APPLICATION ICONJuly 2023September 2024Allow1410YesNo
18347374ENCODING/DECODING USER INTERFACE INTERACTIONSJuly 2023October 2024Allow1510YesNo
18216741AUTOMATED CONTENT CREATION AND CONTENT SERVICES FOR COLLABORATION PLATFORMSJune 2023October 2024Allow1500NoNo
18341221INTERACTIVE FORM EDITOR WITH CONCURRENT AUTOMATIC CREATION OF SCHEMA FILESJune 2023June 2025Allow2440YesNo
18340701GAZE-INITIATED COMMUNICATIONSJune 2023August 2024Allow1410YesNo
18336692MANAGEMENT OF USER INTERFACE ELEMENTS BASED ON HISTORICAL CONFIGURATION DATAJune 2023December 2024Allow1810YesNo
18204888USER INTERFACES FOR MANAGING ACCESSORIESJune 2023March 2025Allow2120YesNo
18326723ARRANGING WORKBOOK ELEMENTS USING A DYNAMIC GRID LAYOUTMay 2023January 2025Allow2020YesNo
18319939USER INTERFACES FOR CONTENT APPLICATIONSMay 2023January 2025Allow2020YesNo
18311713MODIFYING DIGITAL IMAGES USING COMBINATIONS OF DIRECT INTERACTIONS WITH THE DIGITAL IMAGES AND CONTEXT-INFORMING SPEECH INPUTMay 2023November 2024Allow1920YesNo
18296246METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DECOUPLING USER INPUT USING CONTEXTApril 2023October 2024Allow1920YesNo
18116654ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR DISPLAYING PLURALITY OF APPLICATION EXECUTION SCREENS, AND METHOD RELATED THERETOMarch 2023August 2024Allow1830YesNo
18150001AUTOMATED IMAGE PROCESSING AND INSIGHT PRESENTATIONJanuary 2023January 2025Allow2410NoNo
18091725COMPUTER PROGRAM, METHOD, AND SERVER DEVICEDecember 2022November 2024Abandon2310NoNo
18090270Electronic Devices with Translating Flexible Displays and Corresponding Methods for Managing Display Position as a Function Content PresentationDecember 2022May 2025Allow2830NoNo
17962485METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INTERFACE CONTROL WITH PROMPT AND FEEDBACKOctober 2022January 2025Abandon2710NoNo
17937777APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ALTERNATE CHANNEL COMMUNICATION INITIATED THROUGH A COMMON MESSAGE THREADOctober 2022December 2024Allow2630NoNo
17883877INTERACTION INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUMAugust 2022October 2024Allow2650NoNo
17884310USER GUIDANCE FROM GAZE INFORMATION DURING A COMMUNICATION SESSION WHILE VIEWING A WEBPAGEAugust 2022December 2024Allow2920YesNo
17869402MULTI-CRITERIA OPTION COMPARISON TOOLJuly 2022July 2024Allow2410YesNo
17756818REPEAT SECTION IN CHECKLIST BUILDER AND METHOD OF USINGJune 2022February 2025Allow3310NoNo
17729808GESTURE-BASED KEYBOARD TEXT ENTRYApril 2022August 2024Allow2820NoNo
17718749SURGICAL PLANNING GUIDANCE AND LEARNINGApril 2022June 2025Allow3830YesNo
17602260METHOD, DEVICE, TERMINAL EQUIPMENT AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM FOR SYNCHRONOUS DISPLAY OF VIDEO INFORMATIONOctober 2021May 2025Allow4340NoNo
17405444COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODAugust 2021December 2024Allow4010NoNo
17360806Web-Based Data Upload and Visualization Platform Enabling Creation of Code-Free Exploration of MS-Based Omics DataJune 2021April 2025Allow4530NoNo
17180812AIR eCommerceFebruary 2021October 2023Abandon3140NoNo
17156642INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAMJanuary 2021March 2025Abandon4920NoNo
16522031METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CREATING COMBINED MEDIA AND USER-DEFINED AUDIO SELECTIONJuly 2019July 2020Allow1210YesNo
16155633TIME-BASED METADATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR DIGITAL MEDIAOctober 2018September 2024Allow6090YesNo
16132348GENERATING COMPONENT PAGES TO RENDER IN A CONFIGURATION PAGE IN A GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE TO CONFIGURE A COMPUTING RESOURCESeptember 2018November 2019Allow1410NoNo
16033797ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DISPLAYING CONTENTSJuly 2018May 2020Allow2220NoNo
16033621COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUSJuly 2018September 2019Allow1410NoNo
16033807DISPLAY CONTROL DEVICE AND DISPLAY CONTROL METHODJuly 2018September 2019Allow1410NoNo
15241017SELECTING APPLICATION THAT CAN HANDLE DATA CONTENTAugust 2016October 2019Allow3830YesNo
14925853GENERATING COMPONENT PAGES TO RENDER IN A CONFIGURATION PAGE IN A GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE TO CONFIGURE A COMPUTING RESOURCEOctober 2015July 2018Allow3210YesNo
14769319ENGINEERING TOOL PROVIDING HUMAN INTERFACE AMONG PLURALITY OF HUMAN INTERFACES ACCORDING TO USER SKILL LEVELAugust 2015December 2016Allow1620NoNo
14495671TAGGED BROWSING HISTORY INTERFACESeptember 2014May 2017Allow3220YesNo
14469729ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY DURING INTERACTIVE COMPUTER USEAugust 2014July 2017Allow3420NoNo
13462532METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR HYPERLINK LIST NAVIGATIONMay 2012August 2018Allow6060YesYes
13051942CARD STACK NAVIGATIONMarch 2011May 2017Allow6060YesNo
12410617CONTROL DEVICE FOR A MEDICAL IMAGING TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM WITH AN INTEGRATED WEB BROWSER THAT AUTOMATICALLY SUPPLEMENTS QUERIESMarch 2009February 2012Allow3520YesNo
12348363MANAGEMENT OF VIRTUAL DISCUSSION THREADS IN A SYNCHRONOUS CONFERENCING SYSTEMJanuary 2009December 2011Allow3520YesNo
11951002RETURNING PASSED OBJECTS IN A SURFACE BASED COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT USING A VIRTUAL BUNGEEDecember 2007November 2011Allow4720YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BELOUSOV, ANDREY.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
92.9%
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
96.1%
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 BELOUSOV, ANDREY - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner BELOUSOV, ANDREY works in Art Unit 2172 and has examined 47 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 91.5%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 24 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner BELOUSOV, ANDREY's allowance rate of 91.5% places them in the 75% 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 BELOUSOV, ANDREY receive 2.19 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 74% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BELOUSOV, ANDREY is 24 months. This places the examiner in the 70% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +18.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BELOUSOV, ANDREY. This interview benefit is in the 64% 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, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 65% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 21.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 20% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 20.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 11% 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 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.

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.