Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18737287 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS CONFIGURED FOR SIMULATING SPACE-BASED IMAGING OF RESIDENT SPACE OBJECTS | June 2024 | March 2025 | Allow | 10 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18636164 | METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE EFFICACY OF AN AEROSOL FOR PULMONARY DRUG DELIVERY AS WELL AS INHALER DEVICE, ORALLY INHALED AND/OR NASAL DRUG PRODUCT AND DRUG/DEVICE COMBINATION PRODUCT | April 2024 | April 2025 | Allow | 12 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18502198 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ASSISTED PRODUCTION ADVISORY SYSTEM AND METHOD | November 2023 | April 2025 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18498191 | DIGITAL AVATAR PLATFORM | October 2023 | February 2025 | Allow | 16 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18478025 | NEURAL NETWORK CONTROL VARIATES | September 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17761025 | VIBRATION NOISE REDUCTION ANALYSIS METHOD AND ANALYZER FOR AUTOMOTIVE PANEL PARTS | March 2022 | March 2025 | Allow | 36 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17646036 | SIMULATION SYSTEMS USING INVERSE INTEREST | December 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17601432 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MODELING, SIMULATING AND OPTIMIZING FINFET DEVICE BASED ON SELF-HEATING EFFECT | October 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17493088 | METHODS OF DESIGNING INFLATABLE SHAPE-MORPHING STRUCTURES WITH TEXTURED PATTERNS | October 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 42 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17354549 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR OPTION DATA OBJECT PERFORMANCE PREDICTION AND MODELING | June 2021 | December 2024 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17345944 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CREATING AND PRESENTING PLANNING, REAL ESTATE, AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS | June 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 38 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17298527 | CURATED NOTIFICATIONS FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING | May 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17332496 | Simulation-Based Surgical Analysis System | May 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 45 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17296480 | CLASSIFYING LIQUID HANDLING PROCEDURES WITH A NEURAL NETWORK | May 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 44 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17324023 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INTERIOR FURNISHING | May 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17293307 | BASE MODEL SELECTION DEVICE AND BASE MODEL SELECTION METHOD | May 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 45 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17315051 | System for Emulating an Environment for Testing a Time-of-Flight (ToF) Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) System | May 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 48 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17246735 | Context-Based Integrated-Circuit Model for Efficient Electrical Rule Checking (ERC) | May 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17239806 | Apparatus and Method for Immersive Computer Interaction | April 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17238705 | VEHICLE SIMULATOR | April 2021 | May 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17229900 | CONTROL SUPPORT APPARATUS, CONTROL SUPPORT METHOD, COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM WITH CONTROL SUPPORT PROGRAM RECORDED THEREON AND CONTROL SYSTEM | April 2021 | October 2024 | Allow | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17281817 | Flexible Manipulation Device and Method for Fabricating the Same | March 2021 | November 2024 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17203718 | DEVICES, SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND MEDIA FOR POINT CLOUD DATA AUGMENTATION USING MODEL INJECTION | March 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17186608 | VOLUMETRIC TREATMENT FLUID DISTRIBUTION TO REMOVE FORMATION DAMAGE | February 2021 | November 2024 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17179868 | BONE RECONSTRUCTION AND ORTHOPEDIC IMPLANTS | February 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17153943 | SIMULATION METHOD FOR CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSISTOR, SIMULATION METHOD FOR CHARACTERISTICS OF ELECTRONIC CIRCUIT INCLUDING TRANSISTOR, AND NONTRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM THAT STORES SIMULATION PROGRAM FOR CHARACTERISTICS OF TRANSISTOR | January 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17152183 | EVALUATION OF AEROSPACE SYSTEMS | January 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 53 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 17138025 | MODELING COMPONENT LATENCIES IN DATA PROCESSING PIPELINES | December 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 47 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17102292 | LEVERAGING DEEP CONTEXTUAL REPRESENTATION, MEDICAL CONCEPT REPRESENTATION AND TERM-OCCURRENCE STATISTICS IN PRECISION MEDICINE TO RANK CLINICAL STUDIES RELEVANT TO A PATIENT | November 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17101064 | SIMULATION METHOD, SIMULATION DEVICE, AND STORAGE DEVICE | November 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 45 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17005927 | APPLICATION OF BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ON VOXELIZED MESHES IN COMPUTER AIDED GENERATIVE DESIGN | August 2020 | June 2025 | Allow | 57 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16870518 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESS WINDOW OPTIMIZATION IN A VIRTUAL SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE FABRICATION ENVIRONMENT | May 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 59 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16601919 | MACHINE LEARNING FOR ANIMATRONIC DEVELOPMENT AND OPTIMIZATION | October 2019 | October 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16540850 | COMPUTER-AIDED PROSTHESIS ALIGNMENT | August 2019 | November 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 8 | 0 | No | No |
| 16307810 | METHOD FOR ANALYZING VIBRATION DAMPING STRUCTURE OF A TUBE BUNDLE DISPOSED IN A FLUID | December 2018 | October 2024 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15904061 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PREDICTING COMPATIBILITY OF A NEW UNIT FOR AN EXISTING SYSTEM | February 2018 | August 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 15896318 | CORRELATING VERIFICATION SCENARIO COVERAGE WITH HARDWARE COVERAGE EVENTS | February 2018 | November 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner COOK, BRIAN S.
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 COOK, BRIAN S works in Art Unit 2187 and has examined 35 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 68.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 45 months.
Examiner COOK, BRIAN S's allowance rate of 68.6% places them in the 23% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by COOK, BRIAN S receive 2.66 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 89% 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 COOK, BRIAN S is 45 months. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +34.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by COOK, BRIAN S. This interview benefit is in the 85% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 26.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 34% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 0% 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 6% 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 25.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 1% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 99% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 11% 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 13% 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.