Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18958961 | HIGH-THROUGHPUT CONFIDENTIAL COMPUTING METHOD AND SYSTEM BASED ON RISC-V ARCHITECTURE | November 2024 | August 2025 | Allow | 9 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18893567 | DETERMINISTIC NETWORK ARCHITECTURE AND WORKING METHOD FOR INTELLIGENT APPLICATIONS | September 2024 | December 2025 | Abandon | 15 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18709801 | ISCSI SERVICE LOAD BALANCING METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND DEVICE AND MEDIUM | May 2024 | December 2025 | Abandon | 19 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18483100 | WORKLOAD PLACEMENT FOR VIRTUAL GPU ENABLED SYSTEMS | October 2023 | October 2025 | Abandon | 25 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17966206 | SYSTEM SUPPORT REPLICATOR | October 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 36 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17964388 | DELTA BASED TASK ANALYSIS FOR CI SYSTEMS | October 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17902766 | MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, DATA REBALANCING MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM | September 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17854958 | LCS RESOURCE DEVICE FUNCTIONALITY PROVISIONING SYSTEM | June 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17678746 | EXTENSION OF FUNCTIONALITY FOR HIGHLY SCALABLE COMPUTING INFRASTRUCTURE | February 2022 | November 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17030003 | DESERIALIZATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND COMPUTING DEVICE | September 2020 | October 2025 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16401031 | CONTAINER-BASED PARALLEL COMPUTING SYSTEM | May 2019 | October 2025 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15775774 | BALANCING PROCESSING LOADS OF VIRTUAL MACHINES | May 2018 | March 2021 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15831502 | MANAGING A SET OF ASSETS FOR A USER IN A SHARED POOL OF CONFIGURABLE COMPUTING RESOURCES | December 2017 | September 2018 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15831510 | MANAGING A SET OF ASSETS FOR A USER IN A SHARED POOL OF CONFIGURABLE COMPUTING RESOURCES | December 2017 | October 2018 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15828442 | EFFICIENT CRITICAL THREAD SCHEDULING FOR NON-PRIVILEGED THREAD REQUESTS | December 2017 | January 2021 | Allow | 37 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15828792 | EFFICIENT CRITICAL THREAD SCHEDULING FOR NON-PRIVILEGED THREAD REQUESTS | December 2017 | September 2020 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15591370 | TIME-AWARE METHOD OF SCHEDULING APPLICATION TASKS IN A GREEN DATA CENTER | May 2017 | September 2020 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15492748 | MAINTAINING MANAGEABLE UTILIZATION IN A SYSTEM TO PREVENT EXCESSIVE QUEUING OF SYSTEM REQUESTS | April 2017 | January 2020 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15438999 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DYNAMIC GUEST-CONTROLLED HALT POLLING USING A CPU GOVERNOR | February 2017 | May 2020 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15351160 | LOCK PROFILING TOOL TO IDENTIFY CODE BOTTLENECKS IN A STORAGE CONTROLLER | November 2016 | April 2019 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15163752 | EFFICIENT APPLICATION MANAGEMENT | May 2016 | April 2019 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 15149818 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR SERIALIZING PROCESS INSTANCE ACCESS TO INFORMATION STORED REDUNDANTLY IN AT LEAST TWO DATASTORES | May 2016 | August 2018 | Allow | 27 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14926448 | EFFICIENT APPLICATION MANAGEMENT | October 2015 | April 2019 | Allow | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14918100 | SERVER BUILD OPTIMIZATION | October 2015 | March 2018 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14866875 | MECHANISM FOR INSTRUCTION SET BASED THREAD EXECUTION ON A PLURALITY OF INSTRUCTION SEQUENCERS | September 2015 | April 2019 | Allow | 42 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14841004 | THREAD SCHEDULING ACROSS HETEROGENEOUS PROCESSING ELEMENTS WITH RESOURCE MAPPING | August 2015 | November 2016 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14827109 | EFFICIENT CRITICAL THREAD SCHEDULING FOR NON-PRIVILEGED THREAD REQUESTS | August 2015 | October 2017 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14815096 | NETWORK RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM UTILIZING PHYSICAL NETWORK IDENTIFICATION FOR LOAD BALANCING | July 2015 | September 2016 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14792672 | HYPERVISOR CONTROLLED REDUNDANCY FOR I/O PATHS USING VIRTUALIZED I/O ADAPTERS | July 2015 | April 2019 | Allow | 45 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14650747 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SCHEDULING TASK IN CLOUD COMPUTING | June 2015 | July 2018 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14725874 | VIRTUAL MACHINE SWITCHING BASED ON MEASURED NETWORK DELAY | May 2015 | May 2016 | Allow | 11 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14726439 | EFFICIENT CRITICAL THREAD SCHEDULING FOR NON-PRIVILEGED THREAD REQUESTS | May 2015 | October 2017 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14718159 | MANAGING A SET OF ASSETS FOR A USER IN A SHARED POOL OF CONFIGURABLE COMPUTING RESOURCES | May 2015 | September 2017 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14713675 | SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR REMOTE MAINTENANCE IN AN ELECTRONIC NETWORK WITH MULTIPLE CLIENTS | May 2015 | May 2017 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14710307 | BALANCED PROCESSING USING HETEROGENEOUS CORES | May 2015 | July 2015 | Allow | 2 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14683659 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR SERIALIZING PROCESS INSTANCE ACCESS TO INFORMATION STORED REDUNDANTLY IN AT LEAST TWO DATASTORES | April 2015 | February 2016 | Allow | 11 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14682253 | DATACENTER SCHEDULING OF APPLICATIONS USING MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUES | April 2015 | March 2017 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14663977 | MANAGING A SET OF ASSETS FOR A USER IN A SHARED POOL OF CONFIGURABLE COMPUTING RESOURCES | March 2015 | September 2017 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14658350 | PROGRAM DETERMINING APPARATUS AND PROGRAM DETERMINING METHOD | March 2015 | June 2017 | Allow | 27 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14351070 | PROCESSOR IDENTIFICATION FOR VIRTUAL MACHINES | April 2014 | May 2017 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14100706 | MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, RECORDING MEDIUM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING VIRTUAL MACHINES | December 2013 | May 2017 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14099993 | CROSS-PLATFORM WORKLOAD PROCESSING | December 2013 | January 2017 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14088708 | CROSS-PLATFORM WORKLOAD PROCESSING | November 2013 | December 2016 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13948161 | NETWORK RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM UTILIZING PHYSICAL NETWORK IDENTIFICATION FOR LOAD BALANCING | July 2013 | April 2016 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13938683 | THREAD SCHEDULING ACROSS HETEROGENEOUS PROCESSING ELEMENTS WITH RESOURCE MAPPING | July 2013 | August 2016 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13922746 | JOINT OPTIMIZATION OF MULTIPLE PHASES IN LARGE DATA PROCESSING | June 2013 | January 2016 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13674286 | VIRTUAL MEMORY MANAGEMENT TO REDUCE POWER CONSUMPTION IN THE MEMORY | November 2012 | August 2015 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13483744 | MANAGING DEVICE ACCESS USING AN ADDRESS HINT | May 2012 | October 2016 | Allow | 52 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13455238 | INFORMATION TERMINAL APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR SWITCHING CONTROL OF A USER INTERFACE BETWEEN CONCURRENTLY EXECUTING OPERATING SYSTEMS | April 2012 | April 2016 | Allow | 47 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12501270 | DETECTION OF A USB OS DESCRIPTOR REQUEST TO FACILITATE INSTALLATION OF A DEVICE DRIVER | July 2009 | January 2016 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 12483065 | WEB SERVICE INTERACTION IN A DYNAMICALLY EXTENSIBLE BUSINESS APPLICATION | June 2009 | September 2015 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11201975 | RESOURCE PRESENTATION CONVERGENCE | August 2005 | June 2010 | Allow | 58 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11199244 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING LOAD BALANCING IN DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM | August 2005 | December 2009 | Allow | 52 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11146453 | ADMINISTRATION OF LOCKS FOR CRITICAL SECTIONS OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS IN A COMPUTER THAT SUPPORTS A MULTIPLICITY OF LOGICAL PARTITIONS | June 2005 | February 2010 | Allow | 57 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11145452 | METHOD OF ASSIGNING AVAILABLE RESOURCES FOR INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL USERS AT START TIME OF SCHEDULED TIME PERIOD BASED ON PROGRAM RESERVATIONS INFORMATION | June 2005 | April 2010 | Allow | 58 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11125859 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF SHARING PROCESSING RESOURCES IN A MULTI-THREADING ENVIRONMENT | May 2005 | August 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11117925 | INTELLIGENT RESOURCE PROVISIONING BASED ON ON-DEMAND WEIGHT CALCULATION | April 2005 | May 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11117805 | EXTENSIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR TASK DISPLAY AND LAUNCH | April 2005 | August 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11011168 | JOB EXECUTION SYSTEM AND JOB EXECUTION METHOD, AND JOB EXECUTION APPARATUS AND IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS USED FOR THIS SYSTEM | December 2004 | May 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11010471 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR REGULATING BACKGROUND TASKS USING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS | December 2004 | May 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10960839 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SCHEDULING A FUTURE EVENT | October 2004 | January 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10889947 | SYSTEMS AMD METHODS THAT MANAGE PROCESSING RESOURCES | July 2004 | January 2010 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HUARACHA, WILLY W.
With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.
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, 100.0% 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.
✓ 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 HUARACHA, WILLY W works in Art Unit 2197 and has examined 53 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.
Examiner HUARACHA, WILLY W's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 95% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by HUARACHA, WILLY W receive 1.92 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 47% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by HUARACHA, WILLY W is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 33% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HUARACHA, WILLY W. This interview benefit is in the 13% 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, 38.5% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 11.1% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 11% 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, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 94% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 85.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 79% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 16.7% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 2% 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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 18.9% of allowed cases (in the 98% 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 16% 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.