USPTO Examiner PAULINO LENIN - Art Unit 2197

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19211641INTEGRATED MULTI-PLATFORM TEST VALIDATORMay 2025October 2025Allow510YesNo
18789134AUTOMATED COMPUTER CODE GENERATIONJuly 2024September 2025Abandon1420YesNo
18737939METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DENOISING TEST DATA, STORAGE MEDIUM AND COMPUTER DEVICEJune 2024October 2025Abandon1620NoNo
18733926METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECORDING TEST CASE, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND COMPUTER DEVICEJune 2024October 2025Abandon1620NoNo
18420858SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES FOR GENERATING A COMPUTER-EXECUTABLE USABILITY STUDY APPLICATIONJanuary 2024October 2025Allow2140YesNo
18416960METHOD, SYSTEM AND DEVICE FOR GENERATING TEST CASE FOR AUTOMOTIVE CYBERSECURITY DETECTIONJanuary 2024November 2025Allow2210NoNo
18502373TARGET PROCESS INJECTION PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF MARKER LIBRARIESNovember 2023September 2024Allow1000YesNo
18382985AUTOMATIC GENERATION OF ASSERT STATEMENTS FOR UNIT TEST CASESOctober 2023October 2025Allow2330YesNo
18202473SOFTWARE RELEASING METHOD AND APPARATUS, COMPUTING DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUMMay 2023December 2025Abandon3110NoNo
18320142BLACK-BOX FUZZING TESTING METHOD AND APPARATUSMay 2023November 2025Allow3010YesNo
18309967CONFIGURATION AND DEPLOYMENT OF DIGITAL AVATAR ASSETSMay 2023March 2026Allow3420YesNo
18182341SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO CREATE A DEVICE APPLICATIONMarch 2023October 2025Abandon3110NoNo
18100989SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING EXECUTION OF CALL STACK FRAMESJanuary 2023October 2025Abandon3210NoNo
18091421EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTED STORAGE LAYER UPGRADEDecember 2022June 2025Allow2910YesNo
18091160METHOD OF REBINDING COMPUTING UNIT IN HETEROGENEOUS COMPUTING CLOUDS AND APPARATUS THEREOFDecember 2022April 2025Allow2710NoNo
17979230SCALABLE SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISCOVERING AND DOCUMENTING USER EXPECTATIONSNovember 2022November 2025Abandon3710NoNo
17920955CONFIGURABLE CUSTOM BLOCK IN DYNAMIC DATASET BUILDEROctober 2022January 2026Abandon3930YesNo
17961847API DRIVEN CONTINUOUS TESTING SYSTEMS FOR TESTING DISPARATE SOFTWAREOctober 2022February 2026Allow4030YesNo
17937652SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REGRESSION TESTING USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCEOctober 2022June 2025Allow3220YesNo
17950577ANNOTATION DRIVEN JUST IN TIME AND STATE-BASED RBAC POLICY CONTROLSeptember 2022July 2025Allow3440YesNo
17948132CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT FOR NON-DISRUPTIVE UPDATE OF A DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSeptember 2022January 2026Allow4040YesNo
17941003SENTIMENT ANALYSIS USING MAGNITUDE OF ENTITIESSeptember 2022April 2025Allow3120YesNo
17940618GENERATING SYNTHETIC TRAINING DATA FOR PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE TRANSLATIONSeptember 2022November 2025Abandon3840YesNo
17940038PARALLELIZING DATA PROCESSING UNIT PROVISIONINGSeptember 2022March 2026Allow4230NoYes
17898584REMEDIATION ENGINE FOR UPDATING DESIRED STATE OF INVENTORY DATA TO BE REPLICATED ACROSS MULTIPLE SOFTWARE-DEFINED DATA CENTERSAugust 2022June 2025Abandon3320YesNo
17898419SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATED RETROFITTING OF CUSTOMIZED CODE OBJECTSAugust 2022September 2025Allow3630YesNo
17885950OPERATOR MIRRORINGAugust 2022January 2025Abandon3020YesNo
17854484MACHINE LEARNING MODEL SIGNATURESJune 2022September 2025Allow3940YesNo
17847297Information Technology Management SystemJune 2022August 2025Abandon3840YesNo
17732003CONTINUOUS DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY SYSTEMApril 2022July 2025Allow3940YesNo
17520331CODING OUTPUTNovember 2021March 2025Allow4030YesNo
17331070AUTOMATIC PORTABLE DEVICE TESTING METHOD AND SYSTEMMay 2021March 2026Allow5850YesNo
17209509SYSTEM, METHOD AND RECORDING MEDIUM FOR OPTIMIZING SOFTWARE TESTING VIA GROUP TESTINGMarch 2021December 2024Abandon4540NoNo
17202403ISOLATED SOFTWARE TESTING IN PRODUCTION VEHICLESMarch 2021June 2025Abandon5140YesYes
17177149VALIDATING INTER-PARTITION COMMUNICATION IN MICROSERVICE DECOMPOSITIONFebruary 2021September 2024Allow4330YesNo
17248716System and Method for Automated TestingFebruary 2021July 2025Abandon5470YesNo
17107542METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR SELF-SUPERVISED SOFTWARE DEFECT DETECTIONNovember 2020December 2025Abandon6040YesNo
17085263SMART TEST EXECUTOROctober 2020April 2025Abandon5460NoNo
15948659COMPUTER SYSTEM SUPPORTING MIGRATION BETWEEN HARDWARE ACCELERATORS THROUGH SOFTWARE INTERFACESApril 2018March 2020Allow2320YesNo
15433699AUTOMATICALLY ESTABLISHING SIGNIFICANCE OF STATIC ANALYSIS RESULTSFebruary 2017September 2019Allow3130NoNo
15347370FUNCTION CALL VISUALIZATIONNovember 2016January 2019Allow2610NoNo
15344016CONTAINER IMAGES BY COMPOSITIONNovember 2016August 2018Allow2210NoNo
15193908AUTOMATICALLY ESTABLISHING SIGNIFICANCE OF STATIC ANALYSIS RESULTSJune 2016September 2019Allow3940NoNo
15186560Utilizing semantic clusters to Predict Software defectsJune 2016August 2018Abandon2610NoNo
15186556Utilizing semantic clusters to Predict Software defectsJune 2016June 2019Allow3630YesNo
15179131ENHANCING A CROWDSOURCED INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT APPLICATIONJune 2016July 2018Abandon2520NoNo
15178542SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FACILITATING CHANGE BASED TESTING OF A SOFTWARE CODE USING ANNOTATIONSJune 2016October 2018Abandon2820NoNo
15140749ANNOTATIONS IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENTApril 2016April 2020Allow4860YesNo
15044492System and Method for Transforming a Component Business ModelFebruary 2016April 2020Allow5050YesNo
14817779OPERATIONS TO AVOID WRAPPED MOBILE APPLICATION OPERATIONAL ERRORS DUE TO INTERFERENCE FROM WRAPPER LOGIC COMPONENTSAugust 2015July 2018Allow3620NoNo
14817279ANNOTATIONS IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENTAugust 2015April 2020Allow5660YesNo
14816389UPDATING SOFTWARE BASED ON SIMILARITIES BETWEEN ENDPOINTSAugust 2015November 2019Allow5270YesNo
14790534TEST CASE GENERATION SYSTEMJuly 2015September 2017Allow2710YesNo
14727469HARDWARE/SOFTWARE AGNOSTIC DESIGN GENERATIONJune 2015September 2016Allow1500NoNo
14721994SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING INTEROPERABLE APPLICATIONS TO EMBEDDED ELECTRONIC DEVICESMay 2015January 2017Abandon2010NoNo
14689334Layered Business ConfigurationApril 2015September 2017Allow2940YesNo
14688646QUALITY PREDICTIONApril 2015April 2019Allow4850YesYes
14435595COMPILER GENERATING OPERATOR FREE CODEApril 2015October 2017Allow3130NoNo
14683793METHOD AND SYSTEM TO COMPOSE AND EXECUTE BUSINESS RULESApril 2015June 2017Abandon2720NoNo
14672546METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR UPDATING FIRMWAREMarch 2015June 2018Abandon3840YesYes
14663478EVENT SUMMARY MODE FOR TRACING SYSTEMSMarch 2015September 2017Abandon3040YesNo
14659190CONTROLLING DEPLOYMENT OF AN INDUSTRY-SPECIFIC SOLUTION PACKAGEMarch 2015December 2017Abandon3330YesNo
14659374ISOLATING COMPONENTS USING METHOD DETOURINGMarch 2015September 2016Abandon1810NoNo
14659313GENERATING A DEPLOYABLE INDUSTRY-SPECIFIC SOLUTION PACKAGEMarch 2015June 2018Abandon3940YesNo
14547451CORRELATING TEST RESULTS VARIATIONS WITH BUSINESS REQUIREMENTSNovember 2014January 2019Allow5060YesYes
14547514EVENT SUMMARY MODE FOR TRACING SYSTEMSNovember 2014September 2017Abandon3440YesNo
14543355REGRESSION TESTING WITH EXTERNAL BREAKPOINTSNovember 2014August 2017Allow3340YesNo
14398715SUB-PACKAGING OF A PACKAGED APPLICATION INCLUDING SELECTION OF USER-INTERFACE ELEMENTSNovember 2014June 2018Abandon4340YesNo
14499276MULTIPLE TEST TYPE ANALYSIS FOR A TEST CASE USING TEST CASE METADATASeptember 2014May 2016Allow2020YesNo
14476218TEST DATA RESERVATION SYSTEMSeptember 2014April 2018Abandon4350YesNo
14472527USING PRIVACY PERSERVING CROSS ORGANIZATION SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT BEST PRACTICES FOR PROJECT STATUSAugust 2014November 2018Abandon5020YesYes
14471453STRUCTURED QUERY LANGUAGE DEBUGGERAugust 2014September 2017Allow3740NoNo
14467665SPECIALIZED APP DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM AND METHODAugust 2014February 2019Allow5440YesYes
14467905METHOD AND SYSTEM OF EDITING WORKFLOW LOGIC AND SCREENS WITH A GUI TOOLAugust 2014March 2016Abandon1910NoNo
14458158TRACE-BASED INSTRUCTION EXECUTION PROCESSINGAugust 2014June 2016Allow2210NoNo
14336528Method and System for Using a ROM PatchJuly 2014November 2016Allow2830NoNo
14207293PROJECT PLAN GENERATION FROM AN INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE MODELMarch 2014January 2019Allow5870YesNo
14184296INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, NETWORK SYSTEM, PROCESSING EXECUTION METHOD, AND PROCESSING EXECUTION COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTFebruary 2014August 2018Abandon5460YesNo
14181791MEMORY RESOURCE SHARING AMONG MULTIPLE COMPUTE NODESFebruary 2014February 2018Abandon4850YesNo
14181314SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AN EXTENSIBLE WORKFLOW MANAGEMENTFebruary 2014December 2015Abandon2210NoNo
14178560NETWORK CONTROL USING SOFTWARE DEFINED FLOW MAPPING AND VIRTUALIZED NETWORK FUNCTIONSFebruary 2014October 2017Abandon4430YesNo
14238711STARTING A PROCESS USING FILE DESCRIPTORSFebruary 2014September 2017Allow4330NoYes
14175625INTERLEAVE-SCHEDULING OF CORRELATED TASKS AND BACKFILL-SCHEDULING OF DEPENDER TASKS INTO A SLOT OF DEPENDEE TASKSFebruary 2014July 2017Allow4240YesNo
14237475TERMINAL AND METHOD FOR EXECUTING APPLICATION IN SAMEFebruary 2014December 2018Abandon5870YesNo
14124771COMPATIBILITY AND OPTIMIZATION OF WEB APPLICATIONS ACROSS INDEPENDENT APPLICATION STORESDecember 2013November 2018Abandon6040YesYes
14036209System and Method For Transforming a Component Business ModelSeptember 2013December 2015Allow2610NoNo
13973944DEFINING A MIDLET REGION SPACEAugust 2013March 2016Allow3120YesYes
13740634IMPLEMENTING UPDATES TO SOURCE CODE EXECUTING ON A PLURALITY OF COMPUTE NODESJanuary 2013March 2017Allow5060NoNo
13730916SPECULATIVE MEMORY DISAMBIGUATION ANALYSIS AND OPTIMIZATION WITH HARDWARE SUPPORTDecember 2012April 2016Abandon4020NoNo
13728681AUTOMATIC PIPELINE COMPOSITIONDecember 2012March 2016Abandon3920NoNo
13728243DISPLAY APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFDecember 2012August 2018Abandon6070YesNo
13724202SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRANSLATING PROGRAM FUNCTIONS FOR CORRECT HANDLING OF LOCAL-SCOPE VARIABLES AND COMPUTING SYSTEM INCORPORATING THE SAMEDecember 2012May 2017Allow5350NoYes
13806256User Customization Method and SystemDecember 2012January 2017Abandon4940NoNo
13720655TEST SCOPE DETERMINATION BASED ON CODE CHANGE(S)December 2012May 2017Allow5240NoYes
13681474POLICY TO SOURCE CODE CONVERSIONNovember 2012April 2015Allow2910YesNo
13680207MONITORING UPDATES ON MULTIPLE COMPUTING PLATFORMSNovember 2012November 2017Abandon6060YesYes
13679861METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR JOINT SCHEDULING AND LAYOUT OPTIMIZATION TO ENABLE MULTI-LEVEL VECTORIZATIONNovember 2012June 2016Allow4330YesNo
13659845PROJECT PLAN GENERATION FROM AN INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE MODELOctober 2012February 2019Allow6080YesNo
13615181SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AN EXTENSIBLE WORKFLOW MANAGEMENTSeptember 2012February 2014Abandon1710NoNo
13547110MOBILE APPLICATION TRANSLATIONJuly 2012April 2016Abandon4540NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PAULINO, LENIN.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
9
Examiner Affirmed
7
(77.8%)
Examiner Reversed
2
(22.2%)
Reversal Percentile
35.3%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 22.2% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is below the USPTO average, indicating that appeals face more challenges here than typical.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
29
Allowed After Appeal Filing
9
(31.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
20
(69.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
47.3%
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, 31.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is below the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal has limited effectiveness in prompting favorable reconsideration.

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 PAULINO, LENIN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner PAULINO, LENIN works in Art Unit 2197 and has examined 167 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 56.9%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 52 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner PAULINO, LENIN's allowance rate of 56.9% places them in the 17% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by PAULINO, LENIN receive 3.62 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 95% 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 PAULINO, LENIN is 52 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 +12.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PAULINO, LENIN. This interview benefit is in the 49% 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, 11.1% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 6% 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 23.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 32% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 100.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 71% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 67.9% of appeals filed. This is in the 53% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 42.1% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 127.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 96% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 13% 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 16% 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:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • 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 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.