USPTO Examiner MARKS RACHEL ELIZABETH - Art Unit 2412

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18769624MIGRATION OF NETWORK TRAFFIC BETWEEN LICENSED AND UNLICENSED SPECTRUMJuly 2024May 2025Allow1010NoNo
18123634SYSTEM AND METHOD OF PDCCH SKIPPING AND SCHEDULING REQUESTMarch 2023May 2025Allow2610NoNo
17928912METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PERFORMING SENSING IN WIRELESS LAN SYSTEMNovember 2022March 2025Allow2800NoNo
17934520METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MULTI-STAGE DCI FOR UPLINK PRECODINGSeptember 2022June 2025Allow3310NoNo
17941209CODEBOOK FEEDBACK METHOD, NETWORK DEVICE, TERMINAL DEVICE, AND COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUMSeptember 2022June 2025Allow3310NoNo
17901413Communication Method and DeviceSeptember 2022May 2025Allow3210NoNo
17897125WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, CONTROL DEVICE, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTAugust 2022April 2025Allow3110NoNo
17797354Dimensioning Granular Multi-Timescale FairnessAugust 2022May 2025Allow3410NoNo
17875994METHOD AND SYSTEM TO PREDICT THE INGRESS INTERFACE OF INTERNET TRAFFICJuly 2022April 2025Allow3310NoNo
17792143ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND METHOD FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUMJuly 2022March 2025Allow3210YesNo
17756751TECHNIQUE FOR PERFORMING MULTILINK COMMUNICATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMJune 2022March 2025Allow3310NoNo
17824783ACCESS POINT CHANNEL SELECTIONMay 2022March 2025Allow3410YesNo
17742454CYCLE-BASED PER-FLOW PACKET DROP COUNTINGMay 2022June 2024Allow2510YesNo
17732668PACKET SENDING METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEMApril 2022October 2024Allow2900NoNo
17772072WIRELESS LAN SYSTEM, ACCESS POINT DEVICE, AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHODApril 2022January 2025Allow3210YesNo
17727195TECHNIQUES FOR SENDING A COLLISION INDICATION VIA A PHYSICAL SIDELINK FEEDBACK CHANNELApril 2022March 2025Abandon3510NoNo
17765247TERMINAL AND COMMUNICATION METHODMarch 2022April 2025Abandon3710NoNo
17765263Timing Advance for TSNMarch 2022June 2025Allow3920NoNo
17762810METHOD FOR REPORTING CHANNEL FAILUREMarch 2022June 2025Allow3920YesNo
17762675LINK ADAPTATION CONTROL FIELD TRANSMISSION FOR LOW LATENCYMarch 2022January 2025Allow3410NoNo
17760604COMMUNICATION METHODS AND APPARATUSESMarch 2022January 2025Allow3410YesNo
17654715PHASE TRACKING REFERENCE SIGNAL (PTRS) FOR RANDOM ACCESSMarch 2022October 2024Allow3110YesNo
17694274MULTI-ELEMENT ROUTING SYSTEM FOR MOBILE COMMUNICATIONSMarch 2022March 2024Allow2420YesNo
17637354SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING AUDIO QUALITY USING FEEDBACK CONTROLFebruary 2022November 2024Allow3210YesNo
17635328METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING AND RECEIVING SIDELINK SIGNAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMFebruary 2022September 2024Allow3110NoNo
17648867APPLYING UNIFIED TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATION INDICATION STATES TO SIGNALS OR CHANNELS ASSOCIATED WITH CONTROL RESOURCE SET POOL INDEX VALUESJanuary 2022January 2025Allow3620YesNo
17648860APPLYING A UNIFIED TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATION INDICATOR STATE INDICATION TO CHANNELS OR SIGNALS ASSOCIATED WITH A CONTROL RESOURCE SET POOL INDEX VALUEJanuary 2022December 2024Allow3520YesNo
17628954Burst Traffic Detection Device and MethodJanuary 2022October 2024Allow3210NoNo
17627424LINK-ADAPTATION POWER BACKOFFJanuary 2022August 2024Allow3110NoNo
17574972RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR REPORTING SIGNAL-TO-INTERFERENCE-PLUS-NOISE RATIOJanuary 2022August 2024Allow3110NoNo
17556085Adaptive TTI Bundling ConfigurationDecember 2021January 2025Allow3710NoNo
17618629USER EQUIPMENT, BASE STATION, AND METHOD FOR TIME SYNCHRONIZATIONDecember 2021July 2024Allow3110YesNo
17643120CROSS-LINK INTERFERENCE REPORTING IN FULL DUPLEXDecember 2021January 2025Allow3720YesNo
17538907METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR COVERAGE ENHANCEMENT OF TERMINAL IN COMMUNICATION SYSTEMNovember 2021June 2024Allow3110NoNo
17533177Automotive physical layer (PHY) cable fault diagnosisNovember 2021July 2024Allow3220YesNo
17612847METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING SIGNAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMNovember 2021June 2024Allow3110NoNo
17530047APPARATUS AND METHOD OF UPLINK BEAMFORMING IN WIRELESS LOCAL AREA NETWORK SYSTEMNovember 2021October 2024Allow3520YesNo
17526821HIGH ORDER DIGITAL POST-DISTORTION PROCEDURESNovember 2021September 2024Allow3420NoNo
17522236METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR DETERMINING AND RECEIVING V2X MESSAGESNovember 2021October 2024Allow3520YesNo
17520247METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING DATA IN COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKSNovember 2021April 2024Allow3010NoNo
17515004DIS-AGGREGATED SWITCHING AND PROTOCOL CONFIGURABLE INPUT/OUTPUT MODULEOctober 2021July 2024Allow3220YesNo
17470323METHOD AND USER EQUIPMENT FOR HYBRID AUTOMATIC REPEAT REQUEST PROCESS OPERATION IN NON-TERRESTRIAL NETWORKSeptember 2021August 2024Allow3530NoNo
17443926DOWNLINK CONTROL INFORMATION SIZE CONFIGURATION FOR MULTIPLE CARRIER SCHEDULING SCENARIOSJuly 2021March 2024Allow3220YesNo
17359539LOAD BALANCING AMONG OUTPUT PORTSJune 2021April 2025Allow4510YesNo
17323563PHYSICAL LAYER PREAMBLE DESIGNMay 2021May 2024Allow3640YesNo
17220731METHOD FOR SENDING RANDOM ACCESS PREAMBLE SEQUENCE, DEVICE, AND SYSTEMApril 2021April 2024Allow3610NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner MARKS, RACHEL ELIZABETH - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MARKS, RACHEL ELIZABETH works in Art Unit 2412 and has examined 45 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 95.6%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 33 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MARKS, RACHEL ELIZABETH's allowance rate of 95.6% places them in the 87% 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 MARKS, RACHEL ELIZABETH receive 1.33 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 27% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MARKS, RACHEL ELIZABETH is 33 months. This places the examiner in the 27% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +8.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MARKS, RACHEL ELIZABETH. This interview benefit is in the 40% 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, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% 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 66.7% 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.

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 14% 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.