USPTO Examiner PAN PHOEBE X - Art Unit 2179

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19227615System and Method for Scheduling Display of Incoming MessagesJune 2025September 2025Allow410NoNo
18948334METHOD, APPARATUS, DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR DISPLAYING PRIVACY INDICATIONS FOR NAVIGATION TABSNovember 2024October 2025Allow1120YesNo
18345879CONTENT GENERATION FOR GENERATIVE LANGUAGE MODELS IN MESSAGING APPLICATIONSJune 2023October 2025Allow2820YesNo
18255604INTERACTION METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MEDIA OBJECT IN MEDIA LIBRARY, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICEJune 2023March 2025Allow2220YesNo
18252537INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE AND INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAM FOR SLIDE TO EXECUTE TOUCH BUTTONMay 2023May 2025Abandon2420NoNo
17920535AUTHORING TOOL FOR CREATING INTERACTIVE MEDIA STORYLINEOctober 2022December 2025Abandon3830NoNo
17916228MULTI-TASK MANAGEMENT METHOD AND TERMINAL DEVICESeptember 2022September 2025Allow3620YesNo
17953328SYNCHRONIZING MESSAGE STATUS ACROSS MULTIPLE USER DEVICESSeptember 2022September 2024Allow2420YesNo
17939459INTERFACE FOR SETTING SPEED AND DIRECTION OF VIDEO PLAYBACKSeptember 2022December 2024Abandon2720YesNo
17768890PROVISION OF FEEDBACK TO AN ACTUATING OBJECTApril 2022December 2024Abandon3210NoNo
17703147SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENABLING VOICE AND VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS USING A MESSAGING APPLICATIONMarch 2022February 2025Abandon3540YesNo
17589927GESTURE-BASED USER INTERFACEFebruary 2022August 2025Allow4240YesNo
17588200Data Analysis Platform with Animation for Rendering Graphical Representations of DataJanuary 2022March 2025Allow3730YesNo
17648713Browser-Based Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Robot Design InterfaceJanuary 2022March 2025Abandon3730YesNo
17648717Systems and Methods for Executing Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Within a Web BrowserJanuary 2022August 2025Abandon4340NoNo
17647988INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROVISION SYSTEM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD FOR INCLUDING DISPLAY SCREEN IMAGE WITH STATUS EVENT NOTIFICATIONJanuary 2022January 2025Abandon3640NoNo
17565181TECHNOLOGY ADD-ON INTERFACEDecember 2021November 2024Allow3530YesNo
17534731METHOD, AN APPARATUS, AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND A STORAGE MEDIUM FOR SHARING MULTIMEDIA INFORMATION IN SOCIAL MEDIANovember 2021April 2025Allow4040NoNo
17493924SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CUSTOMIZING MEDIA PLAYER PLAYBACK SPEEDOctober 2021June 2025Allow4440NoNo
17490701SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING AGGREGATE GROUP PRESENCE STATE IDENTIFIERSeptember 2021March 2025Allow4150YesNo
17484553MODIFYING A FILE STORAGE STRUCTURE UTILIZING A MULTI-SECTION GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACESeptember 2021March 2025Allow4240YesNo
17310847SYSTEMS AND INTERFACES FOR LOCATION-BASED DEVICE CONTROLAugust 2021October 2025Allow5060YesNo
17375991System and Method for Ignoring Call with Quick Reply Using a Messaging ApplicationJuly 2021December 2024Abandon4140YesNo
17364553DEFINING AND DEBUGGING MODULE COMPLETENESS GRAPHS BASED ON INTERACTIVE USER INTERFACE CHECKLIST ELEMENTSJune 2021June 2025Allow4800YesNo
17149929PLAYLISTS PROGRESS BAR IN AN INTERACTIVE MEDIA GUIDANCE APPLICATIONJanuary 2021December 2025Abandon5950NoNo
17127375SHARING OF COLLABORATIVE DOCUMENTS WITH USERS VIA INSTANT MESSAGINGDecember 2020September 2024Allow4540YesNo
17119551INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAM FOR TRANSITION BETWEEN TWO APPLICATIONSDecember 2020September 2025Allow5860YesNo
17079928SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USING ACTIVITY-BACKED OVERLAYS TO DISPLAY MEDIA CONTENT ON PORTABLE DEVICES DURING PERIODS OF USER INACTIVITYOctober 2020March 2025Allow5340YesNo
17031854PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND WORKOUT MONITOR WITH DAILY ACTIVITY INDICATORSSeptember 2020December 2024Abandon5160YesNo
17031671USER INTERFACES WITH A CHARACTER HAVING A VISUAL STATE BASED ON DEVICE ACTIVITY STATE AND AN INDICATION OF TIMESeptember 2020January 2025Allow5250YesYes
16902971SYSTEMS AND METHOD FOR CUBIC GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACESJune 2020September 2025Allow6060YesNo
16892555Interacting Method for Sidebar Menu with Shortcut Icons, Apparatus and Computer-readable Storage MediumJune 2020January 2025Abandon5560NoNo
16835909ELECTRONIC TIMEPIECE AND NOTIFICATION CONTROL METHODMarch 2020January 2025Abandon5740YesNo
15486285SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ORGANIZING MESSAGESApril 2017November 2024Abandon6090YesYes
15421865CONTEXT-SPECIFIC USER INTERFACES FOR RELOCATING ONE OR MORE COMPLICATIONS IN A WATCH OR CLOCK INTERFACEFebruary 2017April 2024Allow6080YesYes
13288267GRANTING OBJECT AUTHORITY VIA A MULTI-TOUCH SCREEN TO A COLLABORATORNovember 2011June 2016Allow5530YesNo
12874868DYNAMICALLY DEPICTING INTERACTIONS IN A VIRTUAL WORLD BASED ON VARIED USER RIGHTSSeptember 2010March 2016Allow6050YesNo
12238744METHODS, COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS, AND HARDWARE PRODUCTS FOR PROVIDING INTERACTIVE PROGRAM GUIDE AND INSTANT MESSAGING CONVERGENCESeptember 2008December 2013Allow6040NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PAN, PHOEBE X.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
2
Examiner Affirmed
2
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
5.1%
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
3.2%
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 PAN, PHOEBE X - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner PAN, PHOEBE X works in Art Unit 2179 and has examined 22 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 72.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner PAN, PHOEBE X's allowance rate of 72.7% places them in the 36% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by PAN, PHOEBE X receive 4.77 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 99% 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 PAN, PHOEBE X is 53 months. This places the examiner in the 3% 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 +16.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PAN, PHOEBE X. This interview benefit is in the 57% 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, 16.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 14% 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 12.0% 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 7% 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 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 40.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 29% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 12% 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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • 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.
  • 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.