Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18767521 | NEEDS-MATCHING NAVIGATOR SYSTEM | July 2024 | October 2025 | Allow | 15 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18740239 | VIRTUAL INTERACTION SESSION TO FACILITATE AUGMENTED REALITY BASED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN MULTIPLE USERS | June 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 15 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18585553 | VIRTUAL INTERACTION SESSION TO FACILITATE REAL-TIME COMMUNICATION BETWEEN MULTIPLE USERS | February 2024 | July 2025 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18414779 | Smart Energy Hub | January 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18391153 | USING NETWORK TRAFFIC DATA TO IDENTIFY INTERNET OF THINGS DEVICES | December 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18512042 | Network Switch and Network Architecture for Heterogeneous Network Coupling and Backup | November 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18497055 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LLM-ASSISTED EMAIL AUTOMATION | October 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 28 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18270333 | IPV6 ADDRESS CONFIGURATION METHOD AND ROUTING DEVICE | June 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18247586 | METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR ENLARGING USAGE OF USER CATEGORY WITHIN A CORE NETWORK | March 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 31 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18176541 | OBTAINING LOCATION METADATA FOR NETWORK DEVICES USING AUGMENTED REALITY | March 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 31 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18169605 | Distributed Sensor Apparatus and Method using Tensor Decomposition for Application and Entity Profile Identification | February 2023 | January 2025 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18157690 | Congestion Control Method and Apparatus | January 2023 | September 2025 | Abandon | 32 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17205694 | RECORDATION OF VIDEO CONFERENCE BASED ON BANDWIDTH ISSUE(S) | March 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 7 | 0 | No | No |
| 16510090 | PERSONALIZING A SOCIAL NETWORKING PROFILE PAGE | July 2019 | May 2020 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16460076 | BANDWIDTH SHARING | July 2019 | May 2020 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16445753 | Inter-Service Data Transportation Through Data Fragmentation And Socket Replication | June 2019 | March 2021 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16284095 | MONITORING QUALITY OF A CONFERENCE CALL FOR MUTED PARTICIPANTS THERETO | February 2019 | September 2020 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16050537 | BANDWIDTH SHARING | July 2018 | April 2019 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15848106 | BANDWIDTH SHARING | December 2017 | June 2018 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15597274 | CHANNEL OWNERSHIP IN A PUBLISH-SUBSCRIBE SYSTEM | May 2017 | April 2018 | Allow | 11 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15081641 | SCHEDULING AND EXECUTION OF DAG-STRUCTURED COMPUTATION ON RDMA-CONNECTED CLUSTERS | March 2016 | June 2016 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14970202 | SCHEDULING AND EXECUTION OF DAG-STRUCTURED COMPUTATION ON RDMA-CONNECTED CLUSTERS | December 2015 | June 2016 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14838544 | MESSAGE ASSISTANT VIA SMART TEMPLATES | August 2015 | January 2019 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14838933 | BANDWIDTH SHARING | August 2015 | October 2017 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14795031 | POLICY BASED MESSAGE CRYPTOGRAPHIC EXPIRY | July 2015 | January 2020 | Allow | 54 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14717596 | RENEWING REGISTRATIONS FOR CLIENT APPLICATIONS INSTALLED ON DIFFERENT PROXIMATE CLIENT DEVICES | May 2015 | June 2019 | Allow | 49 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 14639383 | CHANNEL OWNERSHIP IN A PUBLISH-SUBSCRIBE SYSTEM | March 2015 | June 2017 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14487327 | DEPLOYING AND MODIFYING A SERVICE-ORIENTED ARCHITECTURE DEPLOYMENT ENVIRONMENT MODEL | September 2014 | March 2016 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14014722 | SCHEDULING AND EXECUTION OF DAG-STRUCTURED COMPUTATION ON RDMA-CONNECTED CLUSTERS | August 2013 | December 2015 | Allow | 27 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14014389 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NETWORK ADDRESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT IN FEDERATED CLOUD COMPUTING NETWORKS | August 2013 | January 2017 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13869133 | Deploying and Modifying a Service-Oriented Architecture Deployment Environment Model | April 2013 | March 2016 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13739359 | PERSONALIZING A SOCIAL NETWORKING PROFILE PAGE | January 2013 | May 2019 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 13739418 | SHORT MESSAGE SERVICE (SMS)-ENABLED OPEN AUTOMATED DEMAND RESPONSE (OPENADR) SERVER AND RELATED COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS AND METHODS | January 2013 | February 2016 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13736243 | METHOD AND APPARATUS TO DISTRIBUTE DATA CENTER NETWORK TRAFFIC | January 2013 | February 2016 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner CADORNA, CHRISTOPHER PALACA.
With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.
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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.
⚠ 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 CADORNA, CHRISTOPHER PALACA works in Art Unit 2444 and has examined 22 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 95.5%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 27 months.
Examiner CADORNA, CHRISTOPHER PALACA's allowance rate of 95.5% places them in the 85% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by CADORNA, CHRISTOPHER PALACA receive 1.77 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 39% 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 CADORNA, CHRISTOPHER PALACA is 27 months. This places the examiner in the 72% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +11.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CADORNA, CHRISTOPHER PALACA. This interview benefit is in the 45% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 30.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 58% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 80.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 96% 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 16% percentile among all examiners. 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.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 15% 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 18% 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.