USPTO Examiner WHIPPLE BRIAN P - Art Unit 2447

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18909312TRANSMISSION METHOD, RECEPTION METHOD, TRANSMISSION APPARATUS, AND RECEPTION APPARATUSOctober 2024March 2026Allow1700NoNo
18904548REAL-TIME TRANSPORT (RTP) HEADER EXTENSION BINDING AND RTP HEADER EXTENSION FOR IN-BAND DELAY MEASUREMENT ON EITHER END DEVICEOctober 2024February 2026Allow1600NoNo
18828971System and Method for MAC Scalability and Host Mobility with Layer-3 Optimized Integrated Routing and Bridging (IRB)September 2024March 2026Allow1800NoNo
18787779SYSTEM FOR DYNAMIC MOBILE APPLICATION SECURITY ASSESSMENT AND METHOD THEREOFJuly 2024October 2025Allow1500NoNo
18786283GEOFENCING FOR INTERNET-OF-THINGS DEVICESJuly 2024February 2026Allow1800NoNo
18780348KEY AND COUNTER MANAGEMENT IN WIRELESS SYSTEMSJuly 2024October 2025Allow1500NoNo
18738388ORACLE-DRIVEN BLOCKCHAINJune 2024January 2026Allow2000NoNo
18717954BLOCKCHAIN SCRIPT ENGINEJune 2024January 2026Allow1900NoNo
18678599MANAGING INPUT DATA ATTACK RESISTANT INFERENCE MODELSMay 2024September 2025Allow1600NoNo
18630196SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SENSOR-AGNOSTIC REPRESENTATION OF HUMAN PRESENCE INFORMATIONApril 2024March 2026Allow2310YesNo
18625369MESSAGE VERIFICATION FOR VEHICLE ECUSApril 2024November 2025Allow1910NoNo
18609497EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTION OF MULTI-DESTINATION PACKETS IN AN OVERLAY NETWORKMarch 2024January 2026Allow2200NoNo
18604244AUGMENTED REALITY GLASSES FOR IRIS-RECOGNITION-BASED AUTHENTICATIONMarch 2024March 2026Abandon2410NoNo
18599078Universal Medical Health RecordsMarch 2024March 2026Abandon2410NoNo
18595812METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROCESSING DATA REQUESTSMarch 2024August 2025Allow1800NoNo
18444572SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ASSESSING COMMUNICATION RESOURCESFebruary 2024November 2025Allow2110NoNo
18427542BENIGN NETWORK ENTITIES BASED MALICIOUS CAMPAIGN SIGNATURE GENERATIONJanuary 2024August 2025Allow1900NoNo
18425095ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-BASED AUTOMATED EVENT LOG MAPPINGJanuary 2024July 2025Allow1800NoNo
18419523METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND MEDIA FOR DELIVERING MANIFESTLESS STREAMING MEDIA CONTENTJanuary 2024July 2025Allow1700YesNo
18415514COMMUNICATION APPARATUS AND COMMUNICATION METHODJanuary 2024November 2025Allow2210NoNo
18411173COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM STORING DATA MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, DATA MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND DATA MANAGEMENT APPARATUSJanuary 2024June 2025Allow1700NoNo
18410398INTERNET OF THINGS END-TO-END SERVICE LAYER QUALITY OF SERVICE MANAGEMENTJanuary 2024September 2025Allow2110NoNo
18391287PROTECTION OF AN ELECTRONIC DEVICEDecember 2023August 2025Allow2010YesNo
18513455INTERACTIVE NOTIFICATION PANELS IN A COMPUTING SYSTEMNovember 2023September 2025Allow2200NoNo
18512095ENFORCEMENT OF FACTORY-PROVISIONED GEOGRAPHIC RESTRICTIONS ON THE OPERATION OF AN IHSNovember 2023October 2025Allow2310NoNo
18388781VERIFIER GENERATED COMMON REFERENCE STRING FOR ZERO-KNOWLEDGE PROOFSNovember 2023September 2025Allow2210YesNo
18496014PROVIDING SURVIVABLE CALLING AND CONFERENCINGOctober 2023November 2025Allow2410NoNo
18376384SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SECURE PROVISIONING OF ACCESS TO TIERED DATABASESOctober 2023September 2025Allow2400NoNo
18373728TERMINAL AND AUTHENTICATION METHODSeptember 2023October 2025Allow2510NoNo
18468389DETERMINING CONTEXTUALLY RELEVANT APPLICATION TEMPLATES ASSOCIATED WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CONTENTSeptember 2023May 2025Allow2000YesNo
18354468METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR VOICE TRANSFORMATION, AUTHENTICATION, AND METADATA COMMUNICATIONJuly 2023April 2025Allow2120YesNo
18192950ESTABLISHING CRYPTOGRAPHIC KEY FOR APPLICATIONSMarch 2023June 2025Allow2710YesNo
17899840TELEMETRY REDUNDANT MEASUREMENT AVOIDANCE PROTOCOLAugust 2022March 2026Allow4220NoNo
17797340A METHOD, A SYSTEM AND A BIOMETRIC SERVER FOR CONTROLLING ACCESS OF USERS TO DESKTOPS IN AN ORGANIZATIONAugust 2022June 2025Allow3420YesNo
17851956DEVICE ACCESS CONTROLJune 2022October 2025Allow4010NoNo
17675254SECURE COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE USING STATE MACHINESFebruary 2022July 2025Allow4120YesNo
17460536IN-BAND CONTROL PLANEAugust 2021September 2025Allow4930NoYes
16797819TRANSMISSION PARAMETER DETERMINATIONS USING ONE OR MORE NEURAL NETWORKSFebruary 2020November 2025Abandon6060YesYes
15073011WEB BASED EXTRANET ARCHITECTURE PROVIDING APPLICATIONS TO NON-RELATED SUBSCRIBERSMarch 2016June 2017Allow1510NoNo
14954081PARTITIONING DIGITAL MEDIA FOR CONSUMPTIONNovember 2015August 2016Allow810NoNo
14525818SYSTEM AND METHOD OF SUPPORTING CONSTRUCTIVE DISCOURSE ON COMPUTERS AND MOBILE DEVICESOctober 2014October 2015Allow1210NoNo
14169888RESOURCE RECOMMENDATION, REUSE AND OPTIMIZATION THROUGH COMMON CONTEXTJanuary 2014March 2016Allow2610YesNo
14150781APPLICATION LEVEL MIRRORING IN DISTRIBUTED OVERLAY VIRTUAL NETWORKSJanuary 2014September 2017Allow4520NoNo
14049361WEB BASED EXTRANET ARCHITECTURE PROVIDING APPLICATIONS TO NON-RELATED SUBSCRIBERSOctober 2013December 2015Allow2610NoNo
13758842USER AS AN END POINT FOR PROFILING AND OPTIMIZING THE DELIVERY OF CONTENT AND DATA IN A WIRELESS NETWORKFebruary 2013January 2016Allow3520NoNo
13713077Device CommissioningDecember 2012November 2015Allow3520YesNo
13459430RESOURCE PLACEMENT IN NETWORKED CLOUD BASED ON RESOURCE CONSTRAINTSApril 2012December 2016Allow5520YesYes
11915871COMMUNICATION DEVICE PROVIDED WITH ARP FUNCTIONNovember 2007May 2011Allow4120YesNo
11395608Methods and apparatus for dynamic presentation of advertising, factual, and informational content using enhanced metadata in search-driven media applicationsMarch 2006July 2015Abandon6070YesYes
10678391NETWORK MEASUREMENT CONFIGURATION APPARATUSOctober 2003March 2011Allow6070YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner WHIPPLE, BRIAN P.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
3
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
6.6%
Lower than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
4
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
4
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
3.8%
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, 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.

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 WHIPPLE, BRIAN P - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner WHIPPLE, BRIAN P works in Art Unit 2447 and has examined 14 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 85.7%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner WHIPPLE, BRIAN P's allowance rate of 85.7% places them in the 63% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by WHIPPLE, BRIAN P receive 2.71 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 80% 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 WHIPPLE, BRIAN P is 41 months. This places the examiner in the 21% 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 -28.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by WHIPPLE, BRIAN P. This interview benefit is in the 1% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 22.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 30% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 91% 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 7.1% of allowed cases (in the 89% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 19% 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:

  • 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.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.