USPTO Examiner CLEARY THOMAS J - Art Unit 2175

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18605991SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING INCREASED POWER USING POWER OVER ETHERNETMarch 2024July 2025Allow1600YesNo
18414552METHOD AND SYSTEM TO GENERATE AN EVENT WHEN A SERIAL INTERFACE IS DISCONNECTEDJanuary 2024November 2024Allow1010NoNo
18534911FRAME-BASED, LOW POWER INTERFACES BETWEEN DEVICES WITH DIFFERENT I/O SIGNALSDecember 2023October 2024Allow1010NoNo
18494976VERIFYING INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN MEDIA DEVICES AND METERS USING TOUCH SENSING INTEGRATED CIRCUITSOctober 2023September 2024Allow1010YesNo
18240082POE POWER AGGREGATION SYSTEMAugust 2023June 2025Allow2120NoNo
18458748SYSTEMAugust 2023June 2025Allow2200NoNo
18361872DYNAMIC PSYS RESISTOR NETWORK FOR IMPROVED ACCURACY AND REDUCED TRANSIENTSJuly 2023May 2025Allow2200NoNo
18339430TIME SYNCHRONIZATION OF COLLECTING AND REPORTING POWER EVENTS BETWEEN HIERARCHICAL POWER THROTTLING CIRCUITS IN A HIERARCHICAL POWER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMJune 2023June 2025Allow2410NoNo
18338288ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE SCALING WITH BODY BIASINGJune 2023May 2025Allow2310YesNo
18326938PACKAGE AND INTEGRATED CIRCUIT WITH INTERFACE DETECTIONMay 2023February 2025Allow2110NoNo
18203434MULTIPLE LEVEL SOC RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND ISOLATION SYSTEM AND METHODMay 2023February 2025Allow2000NoNo
18306557CONTROL SYSTEM, CLOCK SYNCHRONIZATION METHOD, CONTROLLER, NODE DEVICE, AND VEHICLEApril 2023December 2024Allow2010NoNo
18135886ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING CONNECTORApril 2023January 2025Allow2110YesNo
18031051INFRASTRUCTURE ARTICLE SYSTEM FOR SYNCHRONIZING BLINKS OF INFRASTRUCTURE ARTICLES CONNECTED IN MESH NETWORKApril 2023February 2025Allow2210NoNo
18031044POWER SEQUENCE CONTROL OF INTEGRATED SCANNER ASSEMBLY AND IMAGE FORMING ENGINEApril 2023April 2025Allow2410YesNo
18297246SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MITIGATING PEAK CURRENT AND IMPROVING OVERALL PERFORMANCEApril 2023April 2025Allow2410NoNo
18174665MEDICAL CONTROL DEVICE AND MEDICAL OBSERVATION SYSTEMFebruary 2023June 2025Allow2711NoNo
18157481POWER SUPPLY HAVING LOW STANDBY POWER CONSUMPTIONJanuary 2023February 2025Allow2510NoNo
18149653ELECTRONIC SYSTEM AND DETERMINATION METHOD CAPABLE OF DETERMINING REASON OF COLD BOOT EVENTJanuary 2023February 2025Allow2520NoNo
18068526POWER CONSUMPTION MONITORING DEVICE AND METHODDecember 2022October 2024Allow2210NoNo
18066247COMPUTING SYSTEM WITH REBOOT TRACKINGDecember 2022December 2024Allow2410NoNo
18079878ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFDecember 2022September 2024Allow2120YesNo
18065547THERMAL REGULATION & PROTECTION FOR POWER ELECTRONIC COMPONENTSDecember 2022September 2024Allow2120YesNo
18078643Dynamic Control Mechanisms for Backup Power RegulatorsDecember 2022January 2025Allow2510NoNo
17981785BOOT TIME FOR AUTONOMOUS DRONESNovember 2022August 2024Allow2210NoNo
17961257MANAGING POWER IN DATA CENTERSOctober 2022September 2024Allow2330YesNo
17951469POWER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICESeptember 2022August 2024Allow2310NoNo
17802869CONNECTOR AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMAugust 2022October 2024Allow2620YesNo
17839309CLOCK SELECTION IN A CLOCK DISTRIBUTION NETWORKJune 2022February 2025Allow3220NoNo
17692119DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD AND DATA TRANSMISSION SYSTEMMarch 2022January 2025Abandon3440NoNo
17520513METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING CONFIGURATION DATA TO A FIELD-PROGRAMMABLE GATE ARRAY VIA MULTIPLE PROTOCOL MODESNovember 2021August 2024Allow3440NoNo
17362452RACK COMPONENT DETECTION AND COMMUNICATIONJune 2021May 2025Abandon4640YesNo
17323793POWER OPTIMIZED TIMER MODULE FOR PROCESSORSMay 2021December 2024Allow4310NoNo
17246527USB/Thunderbolt to Ethernet Adapter with Dynamic Multiplex Power SupplyApril 2021April 2025Abandon4860YesNo
17233303METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING POWER ANALYTICS OF A STORAGE SYSTEMApril 2021May 2023Allow2531YesNo
17112933METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING POWER ANALYTICS OF A STORAGE SYSTEMDecember 2020October 2023Allow3460YesNo
16713296METHODS AND APPARATUS TO ENABLE STATUS CHANGE DETECTION IN A LOW POWER MODE OF A MICROCONTROLLER UNITDecember 2019July 2023Allow4360NoNo
15090961ACCESS AND PROTECTION OF I2C INTERFACESApril 2016August 2016Allow400NoNo
14600556BRIDGE AND METHOD FOR COUPLING A REQUESTING INTERCONNECT AND A SERVING INTERCONNECT IN A COMPUTER SYSTEMJanuary 2015March 2017Allow2610YesNo
14480540METHOD AND APPARATUS TO ENABLE MULTIPLE MASTERS TO OPERATE IN A SINGLE MASTER BUS ARCHITECTURESeptember 2014October 2016Allow2500NoNo
14252441OLDEST LINK FIRST ARBITRATION BETWEEN LINKS GROUPED AS SINGLE ARBITRATION ELEMENTSApril 2014February 2017Allow3420YesNo
14225781OLDEST LINK FIRST ARBITRATION BETWEEN LINKS GROUPED AS SINGLE ARBITRATION ELEMENTSMarch 2014February 2017Allow3420YesNo
14090182BRIDGE BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT CONTROLLERS FOR TRANSFERRING DATA BETWEEN HOST AND STORAGE DEVICENovember 2013June 2016Allow3110YesNo
14067694ENVIRONMENT BASED NODE SELECTION FOR WORK SCHEDULING IN A PARALLEL COMPUTING SYSTEMOctober 2013April 2015Allow1820YesNo
14030754SHARED RECEIVE QUEUE ALLOCATION FOR NETWORK ON A CHIP COMMUNICATIONSeptember 2013March 2016Allow3010YesNo
13994303METHOD FOR DATA THROUGHPUT IMPROVEMENT IN OPEN CORE PROTOCOL BASED INTERCONNECTION NETWORKS USING DYNAMICALLY SELECTABLE REDUNDANT SHARED LINK PHYSICAL PATHSJune 2013March 2016Allow3320YesNo
13656134DUAL CASTING PCIE INBOUND WRITES TO MEMORY AND PEER DEVICESOctober 2012July 2015Allow3320YesNo
13631876FAST DESKEW WHEN EXITING LOW-POWER PARTIAL-WIDTH HIGH SPEED LINK STATESeptember 2012July 2015Allow3410NoNo
13535650Synchronization Of Data Between An Electronic Computing Mobile Device And An Electronic Computing DockstationJune 2012May 2016Allow4730YesYes
13533861USB HUB AND CONTROL METHOD OF USB HUBJune 2012January 2016Allow4360YesNo
13451275FLASHCARD READER AND CONVERTER FOR READING SERIAL AND PARALLEL FLASHCARDSApril 2012February 2016Allow4620NoYes
13418405SAS FABRIC DISCOVERYMarch 2012April 2015Allow3730YesNo
13205779Synchronization Of Data Between An Electronic Computing Mobile Device And An Electronic Computing DockstationAugust 2011May 2016Allow5730NoYes
13040507THROTTLING INTEGRATED LINKMarch 2011April 2015Allow4940YesNo
12352348SEMICONDUCTOR INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE WHICH EXECUTES DATA TRANSFER BETWEEN A PLURALITY OF DEVICES CONNECTED OVER NETWORK, AND DATA TRANSFER METHODJanuary 2009September 2009Allow800YesNo
11964436INTERRUPT CONTROL CIRCUIT, CIRCUIT BOARD, ELECTRO-OPTIC DEVICE, AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUSDecember 2007January 2010Allow2510YesNo
11787966MICROCONTROL ARCHITECTURE FOR A SYSTEM ON A CHIP (SOC)April 2007September 2008Allow1730YesNo
11539211SOUTH BRIDGE SYSTEM AND METHODOctober 2006July 2009Allow3320NoNo
11276449A METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING DATA IN AN INTEGRATED CIRCUITFebruary 2006December 2008Allow3420YesNo
10961661MICROCONTROL ARCHITECTURE FOR A SYSTEM ON A CHIP (SOC)October 2004December 2008Allow5041YesNo
10946790SELF-ORGANIZED PARALLEL PROCESSING SYSTEMSeptember 2004November 2008Allow5042YesNo
10884414VXS MULTI-SERVICE PLATFORM SYSTEM WITH EXTERNAL SWITCHED FABRIC LINKJuly 2004June 2005Allow1220NoNo
10758040APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CONNECTING PROCESSOR TO BUSJanuary 2004March 2009Allow6030NoYes
10704020APPARATUS FOR MANAGING ETHERNET PHYSICAL LAYER REGISTERS USING EXTERNAL BUS INTERFACE AND METHOD THEREOFNovember 2003October 2006Allow3511NoNo
10445533HIGH-SPEED STARVATION-FREE ARBITER SYSTEM, ROTATING-PRIORITY ARBITER, AND TWO STAGE ARBITRATION METHODMay 2003May 2006Allow3511NoNo
10278493PROGRAMMABLE INTERFACE LINK LAYER DEVICEOctober 2002July 2006Allow4530NoNo
10121661COMPETITION ARBITRATION SYSTEMApril 2002June 2006Allow5030YesNo
10115726ADAPTER, CONVERTED DATA STORAGE DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATION OF A CONVERTED DATA STORAGE DEVICEApril 2002August 2005Allow4120YesYes
10029826EFFICIENT TIMEOUT MESSAGE MANAGEMENT IN IEEE 1394 BRIDGED SERIAL BUS NETWORKDecember 2001November 2004Allow3510NoNo
09996091ARCHITECTURE FOR ADVANCED SERIAL LINK BETWEEN TWO CARDSNovember 2001March 2006Allow5140YesYes
09997355COMPUTER SYSTEM AND PROCESSING METHOD FOR DRIVING PROGRAM OF SMART PERIPHERAL DEVICENovember 2001January 2005Allow3810NoNo
09975323DATA TRANSFER CONTROL CIRCUIT WITH INTERRUPT STATUS REGISTEROctober 2001December 2004Allow3820NoNo
09967121DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD AND APPARATUSSeptember 2001May 2006Allow5630YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner CLEARY, THOMAS J.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
4
Examiner Affirmed
2
(50.0%)
Examiner Reversed
2
(50.0%)
Reversal Percentile
71.3%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 50.0% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. This reversal rate is above the USPTO average, indicating that appeals have better success here than typical.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
6
Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
76.8%
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, 50.0% 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 CLEARY, THOMAS J - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner CLEARY, THOMAS J works in Art Unit 2175 and has examined 71 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 95.8%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 30 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner CLEARY, THOMAS J's allowance rate of 95.8% places them in the 87% 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 CLEARY, THOMAS J receive 2.01 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 66% 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 CLEARY, THOMAS J is 30 months. This places the examiner in the 40% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a -3.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CLEARY, THOMAS J. This interview benefit is in the 5% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 36.2% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 78% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 56.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 78% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.

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 60.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 30% 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.

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 9.9% of allowed cases (in the 96% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.

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:

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.