Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18402962 | Method and Apparatus for Displaying Text Content Copied From a First Application in a Second Application | January 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18538063 | TOUCH PANEL | December 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18387090 | OPERATING METHOD FOR MULTIPLE WINDOWS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE SUPPORTING THE SAME | November 2023 | March 2025 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18487616 | Interactive Geographical Map For Management Of Computing Resources | October 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18367857 | DISPLAYING METHOD FOR KEY INFORMATION INTERFACE, ESTABLISHING METHOD FOR KEY INFORMATION INFERENCE MODEL, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE USING THE SAME | September 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18458674 | INK ANNOTATION SHARING METHOD AND SYSTEM | August 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18546791 | PATTERN SEARCH IN IMAGE VISUALIZATION | August 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18198405 | System and Method for Suggesting Operational Zones for a Worksite on a Device | May 2023 | April 2025 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18318720 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR TOUCHLESS CONTROL OF SURGICAL ENVIRONMENT | May 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18104407 | SYSTEM FOR GENERATING AN OUTPUT FILE | February 2023 | March 2025 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18154061 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR BUILDING DYNAMIC INTERFACES | January 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17998462 | Adaptable GUI for Dashboard Software | November 2022 | January 2025 | Allow | 26 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17980269 | EXTENDED REALITY HUMAN MACHINE INTERFACE TO SIMULATE ACTUAL FLOW | November 2022 | September 2025 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17977989 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SPLIT-SCREEN DISPLAY, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM | October 2022 | June 2025 | Allow | 32 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17841889 | USER INTERFACE FOR SCREENCAST APPLICATIONS | June 2022 | September 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17841832 | Visualized Item Based Systems | June 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17832527 | APPLICATION SHARING METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE | June 2022 | April 2025 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17664263 | DISPLAY APPARATUS, DISPLAY SYSTEM, AND DISPLAY METHOD | May 2022 | November 2024 | Abandon | 29 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17660875 | TOUCH PANEL | April 2022 | May 2024 | Abandon | 24 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17723296 | ADAPTIVE GRAPHIC USER INTERFACING SYSTEM | April 2022 | April 2024 | Abandon | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17722982 | ADAPTIVE GRAPHIC USER INTERFACING SYSTEM | April 2022 | April 2024 | Abandon | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17708282 | DRAG AND DROP QUICK ACTIONS | March 2022 | July 2025 | Allow | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17689999 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD | March 2022 | July 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17587250 | SMALL WINDOW EXIT METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM | January 2022 | November 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 17571226 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DYNAMICALLY NAVIGATING CONTENT | January 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 33 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17559536 | PORTABLE TERMINAL CAUSING AN IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE TO EXECUTE OPERATIONS FOR IMAGE DATA | December 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17558434 | METHOD, APPARATUS AND SYSTEM FOR INTERACTING WITH CONTENT ON WEB BROWSERS | December 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17540661 | FOCUSED MAP-BASED CONTEXT INFORMATION SURFACING | December 2021 | July 2025 | Allow | 44 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17515917 | GENERATION OF GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE PROTOTYPES | November 2021 | August 2025 | Allow | 45 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17451809 | MAPPING INTERACTIVE UI ELEMENTS TO RPA OBJECT REPOSITORIES FOR RPA DEVELOPMENT | October 2021 | December 2023 | Allow | 26 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17494171 | METHOD FOR SHARING CONTENT AND TOOLS INDEPENDENTLY FROM DEVICES, APPLICATIONS, USERS AND TIMES | October 2021 | July 2025 | Allow | 45 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17462929 | Vehicle and Control Method Thereof | August 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 41 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17462020 | CLASSIFICATION METHOD AND CLASSIFICATION DEVICE FOR CLASSIFYING LEVEL OF AMD | August 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17362827 | DYNAMIC ACTIONABLE NOTIFICATIONS | June 2021 | January 2024 | Allow | 30 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17144836 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD FOR INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND PROGRAM FOR DISPLAYING PROCESSING STEP PROGRESS | January 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 50 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16169760 | Computing Devices with Improved Interactive Animated Conversational Interface Systems | October 2018 | December 2024 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16135881 | INTERFACE TO DISPLAY MEDIA COLLECTIONS | September 2018 | March 2025 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15171192 | Device, Method, and Graphical User Interface for Manipulating Application Windows of Virtual Desktops | June 2016 | April 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PARKER, JEANETTE J.
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 PARKER, JEANETTE J works in Art Unit 2179 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 92.3%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 44 months.
Examiner PARKER, JEANETTE J's allowance rate of 92.3% places them in the 78% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by PARKER, JEANETTE J receive 3.92 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 PARKER, JEANETTE J is 44 months. This places the examiner in the 14% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -9.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PARKER, JEANETTE J. This interview benefit is in the 3% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 38% 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 12.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 13% 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 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 33.3% of appeals filed. This is in the 4% 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.
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.
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.