USPTO Examiner METZGER MICHAEL J - Art Unit 2183

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18925482SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PERFORMING INSTRUCTIONS TO CONVERT TO 16-BIT FLOATING-POINT FORMATOctober 2024October 2025Allow1100NoNo
18922873Cluster-Based Placement and Routing of Memory Units and Compute Units in a Reconfigurable Computing GridOctober 2024October 2025Allow1200NoNo
18906205MIXED-SOURCED DEPENDENCY CONTROL FOR VECTOR INSTRUCTIONSOctober 2024September 2025Allow1200NoNo
18889148SM3 HASH ALGORITHM ACCELERATION PROCESSORS, METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND INSTRUCTIONSSeptember 2024January 2026Allow1610NoNo
18830104WRITE BUFFER CIRCUIT SUPPORTING STORE RELEASE COMBINING OF STORE OPERATIONS FROM A MEMORY ACCESS STAGE OF A PROCESSOR INSTRUCTION PIPELINE FOR EFFICIENT PROCESSING OF STORE RELEASE INSTRUCTIONS, AND RELATED METHODSSeptember 2024September 2025Allow1200NoNo
18814641MEMORY DEVICE AND METHOD WITH PROCESSING-IN-MEMORY BLOCKAugust 2024January 2026Allow1710YesNo
18841082LOOPING INSTRUCTIONAugust 2024January 2026Allow1610NoNo
18805711LOOK-UP TABLE READAugust 2024February 2026Allow1810NoNo
18800423Thread Creation on Local or Remote Compute Elements by a Multi-Threaded, Self-Scheduling ProcessorAugust 2024January 2026Allow1710NoNo
18779980STREAMING ENGINE WITH CACHE-LIKE STREAM DATA STORAGE AND LIFETIME TRACKINGJuly 2024March 2026Allow2010NoNo
18773632PROCESSOR WITH ONE OR MORE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE EXECUTION MODESJuly 2024November 2025Allow1610NoNo
18770560Schedule Instructions of a Program of Data Flows for Execution in Tiles of a Coarse Grained Reconfigurable ArrayJuly 2024July 2025Allow1220NoNo
18769206PROCESSING FOR PROCESSORS PERFORMING TASKS HAVING FORWARD CONDITIONAL BRANCH INSTRUCTIONSJuly 2024September 2025Allow1400NoNo
18596106ROBUST, EFFICIENT MULTIPROCESSOR-COPROCESSOR INTERFACEMarch 2024November 2025Allow2020NoNo
18429142VECTOR REDUCTION PROCESSORJanuary 2024August 2025Allow1820NoNo
18406527ENCODING AND DECODING VARIABLE LENGTH INSTRUCTIONSJanuary 2024October 2025Allow2120NoYes
18524222Vector Load Store Operations in a Vector Pipeline Using a Single Operation in a Load Store UnitNovember 2023August 2025Allow2000NoNo
18515206Register Rename for Deterministically Updated RegisterNovember 2023September 2025Allow2200NoNo
18510088REDUCTION OF DATA TRANSFER OVERHEADNovember 2023February 2026Allow2720YesNo
18496013FETCHING VECTOR DATA ELEMENTS WITH PADDINGOctober 2023December 2025Allow2530NoYes
18494696NEURAL PROCESSING DEVICE AND LOAD/STORE METHOD OF NEURAL PROCESSING DEVICEOctober 2023February 2026Allow2720NoNo
18374363BTB PREFECTHING VIA BACK-ANNOTATIONSeptember 2023January 2026Allow2810YesNo
18371635MULTI-LEVEL HIERARCHICAL ROUTING MATRICES FOR PATTERN-RECOGNITION PROCESSORSSeptember 2023November 2025Allow2530NoNo
18237511MICROPROCESSOR WITH APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REPLAYING LOAD INSTRUCTIONSAugust 2023November 2025Allow2610NoNo
18448240REGISTER CLEARINGAugust 2023September 2025Allow2510NoNo
18358894Biased Indirect Control Transfer PredictionJuly 2023November 2025Allow2820YesNo
18337723ACCELERATOR, METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAMEJune 2023January 2026Allow3130YesNo
18335127FPGA WIDE BARREL-SHIFTERS IMPLEMENTATION USING PACKED DSP MULTIPLIERSJune 2023October 2025Allow2820NoNo
18298723PRESERVING MEMORY ORDERING BETWEEN OFFLOADED INSTRUCTIONS AND NON-OFFLOADED INSTRUCTIONSApril 2023August 2025Allow2830YesNo
18180327Vector Instruction Processing After Primary DecodeMarch 2023October 2025Allow3130YesNo
18175333TASK SCHEDULING FOR SYSTEMS INCLUDING MULTIPLE HARDWARE ACCELERATORSFebruary 2023September 2025Allow3130YesNo
17841558DEVICE, METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR EXECUTING A TILE LOAD AND EXPAND INSTRUCTIONJune 2022February 2026Allow4420NoNo
17840029CONCURRENTLY FETCHING INSTRUCTIONS FOR MULTIPLE DECODE CLUSTERSJune 2022March 2026Allow4520NoNo
17745032MEMORY-EFFICIENT STREAMING CONVOLUTIONS IN NEURAL NETWORK PROCESSORMay 2022September 2025Allow4000NoNo
17560554APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR VECTOR PACKED CONCATENATE AND SHIFT OF SPECIFIC PORTIONS OF QUADWORDSDecember 2021January 2026Allow4820NoNo
17514549ZERO EXTENDED 52-BIT INTEGER FUSED MULTIPLY ADD AND SUBTRACT INSTRUCTIONSOctober 2021December 2025Allow4920NoNo
17463374BFLOAT16 SQUARE ROOT AND/OR RECIPROCAL SQUARE ROOT INSTRUCTIONSAugust 2021December 2025Allow5220NoNo
16834834OPERATION CACHEMarch 2020January 2026Allow60100YesNo
16747477Apparatus for Calculating and Retaining a Bound on Error during Floating-Point Operations and Methods ThereofJanuary 2020January 2021Allow1210NoNo
16562959DETERMINING AND PREDICTING DERIVED VALUESSeptember 2019April 2020Allow710YesNo
16516513K-TIER ARCHITECTURE SCHEDULINGJuly 2019January 2021Allow1810YesNo
16502231REDUCING LATENCY OF COMMON SOURCE DATA MOVEMENT INSTRUCTIONSJuly 2019February 2021Allow1920YesNo
16457970CORE-TO-CORE END "OFFLOAD" INSTRUCTION(S)June 2019December 2020Allow1810NoNo
16409993MANAGING AN ISSUE QUEUE FOR FUSED INSTRUCTIONS AND PAIRED INSTRUCTIONS IN A MICROPROCESSORMay 2019August 2020Allow1510NoNo
16408749SYSTEM AND HANDLING OF REGISTER DATA IN PROCESSORSMay 2019November 2020Allow1810YesNo
16239766INSTRUCTION PREFETCHING IN A COMPUTER PROCESSOR USING A PREFETCH PREDICTION VECTORJanuary 2019January 2020Allow1210NoNo
16221379METHOD, DEVICE AND SYSTEM FOR CONTROL SIGNALLING IN A DATA PATH MODULE OF A DATA STREAM PROCESSING ENGINEDecember 2018October 2020Allow2210YesNo
16178740PROCESSOR PREFETCHER MODE GOVERNOR FOR SWITCHING BETWEEN PREFETCH MODESNovember 2018July 2020Allow2110YesNo
16154293Simultaneous Multi-Processor (SiMulPro) Apparatus, Simultaneous Transmit And Receive (STAR) Apparatus, DRAM Interface Apparatus, and Associated MethodsOctober 2018June 2019Allow800YesNo
16117058Speeding Up Younger Store Instruction Execution After a Sync InstructionAugust 2018January 2020Allow1710YesNo
15979657IDENTIFYING AND TRACKING FREQUENTLY ACCESSED REGISTERS IN A PROCESSORMay 2018July 2020Allow2620NoNo
15973816SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND APPARATUSES UTILIZING AN ELASTIC FLOATING-POINT NUMBERMay 2018October 2020Allow2920NoNo
15963243MANAGING OBSCURED BRANCH PREDICTION INFORMATIONApril 2018December 2019Allow2010NoNo
15880188MANAGING BRANCH PREDICTION INFORMATION FOR DIFFERENT CONTEXTSJanuary 2018September 2019Allow2010YesNo
15844740Simultaneous Multi-Processor Apparatus Applicable to Acheiving Exascale Performance for Algorithms and Program SystemsDecember 2017June 2019Allow1810YesNo
15822866PREDICTION OF AN AFFILIATED REGISTERNovember 2017October 2019Allow2220YesNo
15822261CLOCK-GATING FOR MULTICYCLE INSTRUCTIONSNovember 2017September 2019Allow2210NoNo
15819524DETERMINING AND PREDICTING AFFILIATED REGISTERS BASED ON DYNAMIC RUNTIME CONTROL FLOW ANALYSISNovember 2017October 2019Allow2320YesNo
15819450DETERMINING AND PREDICTING DERIVED VALUES USED IN REGISTER-INDIRECT BRANCHINGNovember 2017August 2019Allow2020NoNo
15802776COMPUTERIZED BRANCH PREDICTIONS AND DECISIONSNovember 2017September 2020Allow3510YesNo
15796032LOW-OVERHEAD, LOW-LATENCY OPERAND DEPENDENCY TRACKING FOR INSTRUCTIONS OPERATING ON REGISTER PAIRS IN A PROCESSOR COREOctober 2017January 2020Allow2730YesNo
15684573POWER SAVING BRANCH MODES IN HARDWAREAugust 2017February 2020Allow3021YesNo
15680855DETERMINING AND PREDICTING DERIVED VALUES USED IN REGISTER-INDIRECT BRANCHINGAugust 2017August 2019Allow2420YesNo
15680871PREDICTION OF AN AFFILIATED REGISTERAugust 2017July 2020Allow3530YesNo
15680881CODE-SPECIFIC AFFILIATED REGISTER PREDICTIONAugust 2017August 2019Allow2420YesNo
15599770COMPUTERIZED BRANCH PREDICTIONS AND DECISIONSMay 2017September 2020Allow4010NoNo
15432551STOCHASTIC ROUNDING FLOATING-POINT ADD INSTRUCTION USING ENTROPY FROM A REGISTERFebruary 2017July 2019Allow2940NoNo
15432462STOCHASTIC ROUNDING FLOATING-POINT MULTIPLY INSTRUCTION USING ENTROPY FROM A REGISTERFebruary 2017June 2019Allow2840NoNo
15342141BRANCH PREDICTION USING MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF HISTORY DATANovember 2016June 2017Allow810NoNo
15342139BRANCH PREDICTION USING MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF HISTORY DATANovember 2016June 2017Allow810NoNo
15289388POST-SILICON CONFIGURABLE INSTRUCTION BEHAVIOR BASED ON INPUT OPERANDSOctober 2016April 2017Allow610YesNo
15244741SPECULATIVE BRANCH HANDLING FOR TRANSACTION ABORTAugust 2016November 2016Allow300YesNo
15194666EXTENDING DATA RANGE ADDRESSINGJune 2016April 2020Allow4640YesNo
15096407BRANCH PREDICTION USING MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF HISTORY DATAApril 2016July 2016Allow300NoNo
15075771PREVENTING PREMATURE READS FROM A GENERAL PURPOSE REGISTERMarch 2016January 2019Allow3420YesNo
15052090SPECULATIVE BRANCH HANDLING FOR TRANSACTION ABORTFebruary 2016June 2016Allow300YesNo
15009372STOCHASTIC ROUNDING FLOATING-POINT MULTIPLY INSTRUCTION USING ENTROPY FROM A REGISTERJanuary 2016January 2020Allow4850NoNo
15009397STOCHASTIC ROUNDING FLOATING-POINT ADD INSTRUCTION USING ENTROPY FROM A REGISTERJanuary 2016July 2019Allow4240NoNo
14952020FLUSHING SPECULATIVE INSTRUCTION PROCESSINGNovember 2015June 2016Allow710NoNo
14871959EXTENDING DATA RANGE ADDRESSINGSeptember 2015April 2020Allow5560YesNo
14684150METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING AN EFFICIENT SCATTERApril 2015October 2017Allow3010YesNo
14582859SYSTEMS, APPARATUSES, AND METHODS FOR DATA SPECULATION EXECUTIONDecember 2014October 2020Allow6030NoNo
14519553INTRA-INSTRUCTIONAL TRANSACTION ABORT HANDLINGOctober 2014November 2015Allow1310YesNo
14501093SEMI-EXCLUSIVE SECOND-LEVEL BRANCH TARGET BUFFERSeptember 2014April 2016Allow1920YesNo
14501087ASYNCHRONOUS LOOKAHEAD HIERARCHICAL BRANCH PREDICTIONSeptember 2014March 2016Allow1820YesNo
13994582METHOD, DEVICE AND SYSTEM FOR CONTROL SIGNALING IN A DATA PATH MODULE OF A DATA STREAM PROCESSING ENGINEAugust 2014August 2018Allow6030YesNo
14356816DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSOR, PROGRAM CONTROL METHOD, AND CONTROL PROGRAMMay 2014March 2017Allow3410YesNo
14169601SPECULATIVE LOAD ISSUEJanuary 2014March 2016Allow2520YesNo
13976435APPARATUS AND METHOD OF MASK PERMUTE INSTRUCTIONSJune 2013December 2016Allow4120YesNo
13976359METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PERFORMING A BINARY TRANSLATIONJune 2013November 2017Allow5231YesNo
13992236SYSTEMS, APPARATUSES, AND METHODS FOR PERFORMING A BUTTERFLY HORIZONTAL AND CROSS ADD OR SUBSTRACT IN RESPONSE TO A SINGLE INSTRUCTIONJune 2013May 2016Allow3610YesNo
13991858EFFICIENT ZERO-BASED DECOMPRESSIONJune 2013October 2016Allow4020NoNo
13868403MANAGEMENT OF SHARED TRANSACTIONAL RESOURCESApril 2013July 2016Allow3920YesNo
13868392DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT OF A TRANSACTION RETRY INDICATIONApril 2013April 2016Allow3610NoNo
13841576OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE FOR CONTEXT-DEPENDENT INSTRUCTIONSMarch 2013April 2017Allow4920YesYes
13799670SPECIAL CASE REGISTER UPDATE WITHOUT EXECUTIONMarch 2013September 2016Abandon4230YesNo
13783572RESTRICTED INSTRUCTIONS IN TRANSACTIONAL EXECUTIONMarch 2013May 2016Allow3820NoNo
13783312RESTRICTING PROCESSING WITHIN A PROCESSOR TO FACILITATE TRANSACTION COMPLETIONMarch 2013November 2015Allow3320YesNo
13783353SAVING/RESTORING SELECTED REGISTERS IN TRANSACTIONAL PROCESSINGMarch 2013September 2015Allow3110NoNo
13783357RANDOMIZED TESTING WITHIN TRANSACTIONAL EXECUTIONMarch 2013December 2015Allow3320YesNo

Appeals Overview

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
2
(66.7%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(33.3%)
Reversal Percentile
50.9%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 33.3% 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
5
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(40.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(60.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
65.5%
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, 40.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.

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 METZGER, MICHAEL J - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner METZGER, MICHAEL J works in Art Unit 2183 and has examined 97 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 92.8%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner METZGER, MICHAEL J's allowance rate of 92.8% places them in the 79% 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 METZGER, MICHAEL J receive 2.10 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 56% 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 METZGER, MICHAEL J is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 32% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +10.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by METZGER, MICHAEL J. This interview benefit is in the 43% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 38.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 88% 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 63.6% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 88% 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 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 62.5% of appeals filed. This is in the 40% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 20.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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, 12.5% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 8% 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 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 15% 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.

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.