USPTO Examiner DASCOMB JACOB D - Art Unit 2198

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18443540APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR A MISSION CRITICAL OPERATING ENVIRONMENT CONTAINER ARCHITECTUREFebruary 2024October 2025Allow2040YesNo
18241386HYPERVISOR COMMUNICATION CONGESTION CONTROL IN A VEHICLE DURING VIRTUAL MACHINE ACTIVATIONSeptember 2023January 2026Allow2800NoNo
18339654MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTATION AND DISCOVERY (MID) SERVER SUPPORT FOR EXECUTING AUTOMATED FLOWS WITHIN A CLOUD BASED SYSTEMJune 2023October 2025Allow2840YesNo
18131726PROACTIVE ADJUSTMENT OF RESOURCE ALLOCATION TO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ASSETS BASED ON PREDICTED RESOURCE UTILIZATIONApril 2023January 2026Allow3310YesNo
18128939USING OSTREE NATIVE CONTAINERS TO CUSTOMIZE VIRTUAL MACHINES FOR LIGHTWEIGHT APPLICATION DEPLOYMENTMarch 2023November 2025Allow3110NoNo
18122804VIRTUAL MACHINE (VM) MIGRATION WITH SMART NETWORK INTERFACE CARDS (NICS)March 2023January 2026Allow3410YesNo
18121619APPLICATION TOPOLOGY DERIVATION IN A VIRTUALIZED COMPUTING SYSTEMMarch 2023March 2026Abandon3610NoNo
18113331PREDICTED-TEMPERATURE-BASED VIRTUAL MACHINE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMFebruary 2023November 2025Allow3310YesNo
18105719METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIA FOR USING OPTIMIZED TOKEN BUCKET ALGORITHM FOR INGRESS MESSAGE RATE LIMITING ACROSS DISTRIBUTED PRODUCER NETWORK FUNCTION (NF) APPLICATIONSFebruary 2023December 2025Allow3410YesNo
18156331REGISTRATION AND DEPLOYMENT OF AN AGENT PLATFORM APPLIANCE IN A HYBRID ENVIRONMENTJanuary 2023March 2026Abandon3710NoNo
18148792CANCELLATION OF A MIGRATION-BASED UPGRADE USING A NETWORK SWAP WORKFLOWDecember 2022December 2025Allow3610YesNo
18086715PROXY-BASED AGENT INSTALLATIONS IN DATA CENTERSDecember 2022March 2026Abandon3810NoNo
18076163METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MIGRATING VIRTUAL MACHINE IN MEMORY-DISAGGREGATED ENVIRONMENTDecember 2022November 2025Allow3610NoNo
18070118HYBRID VIRTUAL MACHINE ALLOCATION OPTIMIZATION SYSTEM AND METHODNovember 2022November 2025Allow3510YesNo
17980204INFERENCE SERVICE DEPLOYMENT METHOD, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMNovember 2022February 2026Allow4010NoNo
17935592DYNAMIC POD PRIORITY INFERENCE UTILIZING SERVICE MESH TELEMETRY DATASeptember 2022October 2025Allow3710YesNo
17839999Resource Adjustment Method and ApparatusJune 2022September 2025Allow4010NoNo
17660728METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PERFORMING NON-PARAMETRIC STOCHASTIC SEQUENTIAL ASSIGNMENT OF JOBS WITH RANDOM ARRIVAL TIMESApril 2022September 2025Allow4110NoNo
17655313MICROKERNEL WITH TRANSPARENT CLOUD-BASED OFFLOADING OF PROCESSING - DESKTOP-AS-A-SERVICEMarch 2022September 2025Allow4210NoNo
17669088FEEDBACK-BASED TUNING OF TELEMETRY COLLECTION PARAMETERSFebruary 2022October 2025Allow4430YesNo
17576436VIRTUAL MEDIA OFFLOAD IN SMART NETWORK INTERFACE CONTROLLERJanuary 2022November 2025Allow4620NoNo
17504849STORAGE VIRTUALIZATION DEVICE SUPPORTING VIRTUAL MACHINE, OPERATION METHOD THEREOF, AND OPERATION METHOD OF SYSTEM HAVING THE SAMEOctober 2021November 2025Allow4940YesNo
17504036SERVER PERFORMANCE AND APPLICATION HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHODOctober 2021November 2025Abandon4930NoNo
17501627DYNAMICALLY PERFORMING A STORAGE SERVICE JOB WORKFLOWOctober 2021July 2025Allow4530YesNo
17372342TASK BASED SERVICE MANAGEMENT PLATFORMJuly 2021September 2025Allow5020NoYes
16699823TIME FRAME BOUNDED EXECUTION OF COMPUTATIONAL ALGORITHMSDecember 2019November 2020Allow1110YesNo
16435938APPARATUS AND METHOD TO PROVIDE HELP INFORMATION TO A USER IN A TIMELY MANNERJune 2019May 2021Allow2410NoNo
16399869MANAGING VIRTUAL CLUSTERING ENVIRONMENTS ACCORDING TO REQUIREMENTSApril 2019September 2020Allow1710NoNo
16327998ON-BOARD UPDATE DEVICE AND ON-BOARD UPDATE SYSTEMFebruary 2019February 2021Allow2410NoNo
16268960THREAD-AWARE CONTROLLERFebruary 2019January 2021Allow2300YesNo
16208330METHODS, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR ACCESSING A SHARED COMPUTING RESOURCEDecember 2018October 2020Allow2210YesNo
16303579TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPLEMENTING CONSOLIDATED DEVICE INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMSNovember 2018May 2021Allow3011YesNo
16124554HIERARCHICAL PROCESS GROUP MANAGEMENTSeptember 2018January 2020Allow1610NoNo
16101972COMPUTER SYSTEM WORKLOAD MANAGERAugust 2018March 2021Allow3110NoNo
16033100PROGRAMMABLE STATE MACHINE CONTROLLER IN A PARALLEL PROCESSING SYSTEMJuly 2018June 2020Allow2310YesNo
16029310METHOD TO DESIGN AND TEST WORKFLOWSJuly 2018July 2020Allow2510YesNo
15987473TASK DEPLOYMENT METHOD, TASK DEPLOYMENT APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUMMay 2018October 2020Allow2930NoNo
15977893USER SPACE PRE-EMPTIVE REAL-TIME SCHEDULERMay 2018December 2020Allow3130NoNo
15969375LAZY DATA LOADING FOR IMPROVING MEMORY CACHE HIT RATIO IN DAG-BASED COMPUTATIONAL SYSTEMMay 2018January 2020Allow2100NoNo
15945921WORKLOAD MANAGEMENT WITH DATA ACCESS AWARENESS BY AGGREGATING FILE LOCALITY INFORMATION IN A COMPUTING CLUSTERApril 2018April 2020Allow2510NoNo
15887317CONTAINER DEPLOYMENT METHOD AND APPARATUSFebruary 2018January 2020Allow2410NoNo
15750176METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR LOGGING OUT OF APPLICATIONFebruary 2018December 2019Allow2210NoNo
15838744MANAGING A VIRTUAL COMPUTER RESOURCEDecember 2017April 2019Allow1610YesNo
15833193TIME FRAME BOUNDED EXECUTION OF COMPUTATIONAL ALGORITHMSDecember 2017October 2019Allow2230YesNo
15635124TECHNIQUES TO MIGRATE A VIRTUAL MACHINE USING DISAGGREGATED COMPUTING RESOURCESJune 2017February 2021Allow4420NoNo
15399681Affinity Data Collection in a Computing SystemJanuary 2017May 2018Allow1710YesNo
15270391TIME FRAME BOUNDED EXECUTION OF COMPUTATIONAL ALGORITHMSSeptember 2016October 2019Allow3630YesNo
15270975MULTI-PLATFORM SCHEDULER FOR PERMANENT AND TRANSIENT APPLICATIONSSeptember 2016February 2019Allow2910NoNo
15269105AUTOMATIC COMMENT EDITING FOR A SMART INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTSeptember 2016March 2017Allow620YesNo
15191600HIERARCHICAL PROCESS GROUP MANAGEMENTJune 2016July 2018Allow2410YesNo
14978182THREAD AND/OR VIRTUAL MACHINE SCHEDULING FOR CORES WITH DIVERSE CAPABILITIESDecember 2015March 2019Allow3930YesNo
14954382MANAGING A VIRTUAL COMPUTER RESOURCENovember 2015August 2017Allow2110YesNo
14740748SELECTING PROVISIONING TARGETS FOR NEW VIRTUAL MACHINE INSTANCESJune 2015July 2016Allow1300YesNo
14501370TESTING A SOFTWARE INTERFACE FOR A STREAMING HARDWARE DEVICESeptember 2014December 2015Allow1420YesNo
14385258PERIODIC ACCESS OF A HARDWARE RESOURCESeptember 2014November 2016Allow2620YesNo
14382259AUTOMATICALLY BRIDGING THE SEMANTIC GAP IN MACHINE INTROSPECTIONAugust 2014October 2016Allow2620YesNo
14067159SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRACKING SUSPICION ACROSS APPLICATION BOUNDARIESOctober 2013June 2017Allow4440YesNo
14031073MANAGING A VIRTUAL COMPUTER RESOURCESeptember 2013December 2015Allow2610YesNo
13704737Virtual Machine Merging Method and SystemAugust 2013June 2016Allow4130YesNo
13968602VIRTUAL MACHINE-TO-IMAGE AFFINITY ON A PHYSICAL SERVERAugust 2013March 2015Allow1920NoNo
13850975HARDWARE SUPPORT FOR PROCESSING VIRTUAL MACHINE INSTRUCTIONSMarch 2013June 2016Allow3930YesNo
13803717TESTING A SOFTWARE INTERFACE FOR A STREAMING HARDWARE DEVICEMarch 2013December 2015Allow3330YesNo
13792207TRACE COVERAGE ANALYSISMarch 2013July 2015Allow2820YesNo
13787507DYNAMIC RECONFIGURABLE COMPILERMarch 2013April 2018Allow6060YesYes
13770105Virtual Machine-to-Image Affinity on a Physical ServerFebruary 2013March 2015Allow2520YesNo
13765389SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REPURPOSING VIRTUAL MACHINESFebruary 2013March 2016Allow3720YesNo
13761866SCHEDULER, MULTI-CORE PROCESSOR SYSTEM, AND SCHEDULING METHODFebruary 2013October 2015Allow3320YesNo
13760119JOB MANAGEMENT APPARATUS AND JOB MANAGEMENT METHODFebruary 2013October 2015Allow3220YesNo
13814150METHOD FOR CONSTRUCTING DATA STRUCTURES AND METHOD FOR DESCRIBING RUNNING STATES OF COMPUTER AND STATE TRANSITIONS THEREOFFebruary 2013September 2016Allow4440YesNo
13666607UPGRADE FIRMWARE WITH UPGRADE INFORMATION FROM A TAPE CARTRIDGE IN A WIRELESS MANNERNovember 2012April 2014Allow1800YesNo
13606970SELECTING PROVISIONING TARGETS FOR NEW VIRTUAL MACHINE INSTANCESSeptember 2012May 2015Allow3220YesNo
13585084FACILITATING CUSTOMER-INITIATED VIRTUAL MACHINE MIGRATION AND SWAPPINGAugust 2012December 2014Allow2810YesNo
13566460SELECTING PROVISIONING TARGETS FOR NEW VIRTUAL MACHINE INSTANCESAugust 2012May 2015Allow3320YesNo
13553656REMOTE VIRTUAL MACHINE MIGRATION PORT MANAGEMENT DEVICE AND SYSTEMJuly 2012November 2014Allow2710YesNo
13483888SYSTEM AND METHOD OF PROVIDING IN-APP SERVICEMay 2012April 2017Allow5850YesNo
13465980Read and Write Barriers for Flexible and Efficient Garbage CollectionMay 2012December 2014Allow3110YesNo
13463633TOOL TO ANALYZE DEPENDENCY INJECTION OBJECT GRAPHS FOR COMMON ERROR PATTERNSMay 2012August 2015Allow4030YesNo
13408720MULTIPLE QUEUE MANAGEMENT AND ADAPTIVE CPU MATCHING IN A VIRTUAL COMPUTING SYSTEMFebruary 2012June 2015Allow3940YesNo
13370936DISCOVERING WORK-ITEM RELATIONS THROUGH FULL TEXT AND STANDARD METHOD ANALYSISFebruary 2012November 2016Allow5740YesNo
13295820Arbitrating Resource Acquisition For Applications of a Multi-Processor Mobile Communications DeviceNovember 2011December 2015Allow4941YesNo
13272186DEVELOPMENT TOOL FOR FOOTPRINT REDUCTIONOctober 2011August 2016Allow5860YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DASCOMB, JACOB D.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
92.9%
Higher than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
96.5%
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, 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.

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 DASCOMB, JACOB D - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DASCOMB, JACOB D works in Art Unit 2198 and has examined 60 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 98.3%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 29 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DASCOMB, JACOB D's allowance rate of 98.3% places them in the 91% 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 DASCOMB, JACOB D receive 2.07 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 54% 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 DASCOMB, JACOB D is 29 months. This places the examiner in the 63% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +6.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DASCOMB, JACOB D. This interview benefit is in the 33% 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, 32.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 68% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 49% 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 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 48% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 50.0% 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, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.

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:

    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.