Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18791936 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ENHANCING SOUND QUALITY AND REDUCING CURRENT CONSUMPTION | August 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18675296 | Wearable Acoustic Device, Wearable Acoustic System, and Acoustic Processing Method | May 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18700214 | METHOD OF RENDERING AN AUDIO ELEMENT HAVING A SIZE, CORRESPONDING APPARATUS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM | April 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18690503 | EFFICIENT MODELING OF FILTERS | March 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18439391 | GEOLOCATIONING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR USE OF SAME | February 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 21 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18411970 | Binaural Rendering Interactions | January 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18378061 | PALM RECOGNITION DEVICE | October 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16693774 | TECHNIQUE FOR AUTOMATICALLY TRACKING AN OBJECT BY A CAMERA BASED ON IDENTIFICATION OF AN OBJECT | November 2019 | August 2021 | Abandon | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16691451 | APPARATUS AND METHOD OF PROVIDING BROADCASTING SERVICES SIMULTANEOUSLY | November 2019 | February 2022 | Abandon | 27 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16576763 | DIGITAL CONTENT CREATION AND DELIVERY WITH ADVERTISING CONTENT | September 2019 | July 2023 | Abandon | 46 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16518297 | DISPLAY CONTROL DEVICE, DISPLAY CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAM | July 2019 | February 2022 | Abandon | 31 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16471352 | HEAD MOUNTED DISPLAY DEVICE AND VISUAL AIDING METHOD | June 2019 | September 2020 | Abandon | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16260613 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DECODING METADATA INCLUDING MULTIPLE SEGMENTS OF AN AUDIOVISUAL STREAM | January 2019 | December 2019 | Abandon | 10 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16159346 | ROBUST SLEEPING OBJECT DETECTION IN VIDEO ANALYTICS | October 2018 | August 2020 | Abandon | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15988872 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SECURE CROSS-PLATFORM VIDEO TRANSMISSION | May 2018 | December 2019 | Abandon | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15647738 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR STORAGE ACCESS INPUT/OUTPUT OPERATIONS IN A VIRTUALIZED ENVIRONMENT | July 2017 | September 2019 | Abandon | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15498442 | OUTPUTTING AN AUDIO SEGMENT AND/OR A VIDEO SEGMENT OF AN APPLICATION AT A FIRST DEVICE WHEN THE AUDIO SEGMENT AND/OR VIDEO SEGMENT IS NOT OUTPUT ON A SECOND DEVICE | April 2017 | July 2020 | Abandon | 39 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15489413 | PORTABLE PHONE AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING INCOMING MESSAGE NOTIFICATIONS DURING VIDEO OPERATIONS THEREOF | April 2017 | August 2019 | Abandon | 28 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 15507225 | MANAGEMENT OF THE CHANNEL BAR | February 2017 | August 2017 | Abandon | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 15411313 | Community Controlled Audio Entertainment System | January 2017 | June 2017 | Abandon | 5 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 15250938 | Changing HDMI Content in a Tiled Window | August 2016 | April 2019 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15246375 | VIEW RATE MEASUREMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS | August 2016 | June 2019 | Abandon | 34 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15134766 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE, DISPLAY APPARATUS, AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE ELECTRONIC DEVICE | April 2016 | October 2016 | Abandon | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 15082525 | Video Surveillance Method, Surveillance Server, and Surveillance System | March 2016 | April 2017 | Abandon | 12 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 15071707 | DISTRIBUTED CONTENT POPULARITY DETERMINATION IN A STREAMING ENVIRONMENT WITH INTERCONNECTED SET-TOP BOXES | March 2016 | January 2019 | Allow | 34 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 14878810 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR RENDERING BROADCAST SERVICE | October 2015 | March 2016 | Abandon | 5 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14847812 | ACCESSING REMOTE VIDEO DEVICES | September 2015 | December 2020 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 14829393 | System and Method for Providing Curated Content Items | August 2015 | December 2019 | Allow | 52 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14635611 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING TUNERS OF CLIENT DEVICES | March 2015 | April 2019 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 14423538 | ELECTRONIC MEDIA SERVER FOR PROVIDING MEDIA CHANNEL INFORMATION | February 2015 | July 2020 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 14622172 | REPRODUCING DEVICE, REPRODUCING METHOD, RECEIVING APPARATUS, AND REPRODUCING SYSTEM FOR SPECIFYING VIEWING RECORD OF PROGRAM CONTENT REMOTELY VIEWED BY USER | February 2015 | November 2016 | Abandon | 21 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 14568409 | Video Processing Method, Terminal, and Caption Server | December 2014 | June 2015 | Abandon | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13995995 | REAL-TIME TOPIC-RELEVANT TARGETED ADVERTISING LINKED TO MEDIA EXPERIENCES | August 2014 | March 2019 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14470830 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE, DISPLAY METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT | August 2014 | March 2016 | Abandon | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14468076 | Method, Scene List Output Device, Program, and Server | August 2014 | December 2015 | Abandon | 16 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14250971 | FLAT RATE BILLING OF CONTENT DISTRIBUTION | April 2014 | April 2021 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 14208963 | ADVERTISEMENT USER INTERFACE | March 2014 | February 2022 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14173551 | SIDE CHANNEL CACHING AND TRIGGERING OF CONTEXTUAL ADVERTISEMENTS FOR LIVE BROADCAST VIDEO STREAMING TO MOBILE COMPUTING DEVICES | February 2014 | April 2015 | Abandon | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14141240 | MULTI-USER TV USER INTERFACE | December 2013 | May 2014 | Abandon | 5 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14091387 | Video Replication and Placement Method | November 2013 | November 2016 | Abandon | 35 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 14032185 | Delivering Video Program by Digital Television System and Mobile Communication Device | September 2013 | July 2015 | Abandon | 22 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 13512323 | System And Method For Automated Set-Top Box Testing Via Configurable Event Time Measurements | September 2012 | July 2015 | Abandon | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13534856 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROVIDING IMAGE-ASSOCIATED INFORMATION | June 2012 | February 2017 | Abandon | 55 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13531379 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING SERVICE USING A PORTABLE TERMINAL IN TELEVISION | June 2012 | October 2019 | Abandon | 60 | 8 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 13370483 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS WITH DIFFERENT USER TERMINALS | February 2012 | April 2014 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13061834 | Application Execution System for Digital Television, Apparatus for Application Execution for Digital Television and Method to Implement Said System | May 2011 | September 2017 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 12958964 | DIGITAL BROADCAST RECEIVER AND BROADCAST DATA DISPLAY METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUS DISPLAY OF MULTI-CHANNEL VISUAL IMAGES | December 2010 | April 2015 | Abandon | 52 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12800713 | Multimedia content production and distribution platform | May 2010 | December 2012 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12501369 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CUSTOMIZED INITIALIZATION OF DIGITAL HOST DEVICE | July 2009 | May 2015 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 12317481 | Social broadcasting | December 2008 | April 2015 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12285250 | Method of processing data of a host in an internet protocol television (IPTV) system and the apparatus thereof | September 2008 | May 2017 | Abandon | 60 | 7 | 0 | No | No |
| 12037129 | IPTV CAPABLE OF AUTO CHANNEL SETTING AND METHOD THEREOF | February 2008 | October 2015 | Abandon | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11747554 | INTERACTIVE THEATER SYSTEM AND METHOD | May 2007 | August 2010 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11624425 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROVIDING USER CONTROL OF VIDEO VIEWS | January 2007 | May 2015 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11603795 | Method and system for providing broadband access, HDTV, and broadband-enabled services | November 2006 | April 2010 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11519304 | Integrated command center for flat screen televisions, and internet protocol monitors | September 2006 | May 2009 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11148313 | Structure of metadata and processing method of the metadata | June 2005 | March 2009 | Abandon | 45 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 11050368 | Systems and methods for providing approximated information in an interactive television program guide | February 2005 | December 2009 | Abandon | 58 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11013455 | Caption data, and digital television receiver using caption data and caption data displaying method | December 2004 | May 2010 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 11009232 | Apparatus and method for processing image | December 2004 | August 2010 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 10970429 | Programming content capturing and processing system and method | October 2004 | June 2015 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 10955634 | Remote jack pack | September 2004 | June 2017 | Abandon | 60 | 10 | 1 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PENDLETON, BRIAN T.
With a 28.6% 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.
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, 20.0% 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.
⚠ 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 PENDLETON, BRIAN T works in Art Unit 2425 and has examined 55 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 5.5%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 35 months.
Examiner PENDLETON, BRIAN T's allowance rate of 5.5% places them in the 1% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by PENDLETON, BRIAN T receive 2.89 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 84% 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 PENDLETON, BRIAN T is 35 months. This places the examiner in the 39% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +9.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PENDLETON, BRIAN T. This interview benefit is in the 43% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 1.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 1% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 3.4% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 5% 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, 66.7% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 54% 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 22.2% of appeals filed. This is in the 3% 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 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, 88.9% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 88% 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 14% 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 17% 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.