Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17125068 | TEXT MESSAGE INTEGRATION WITH A COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED COLLABORATION PLATFORM | December 2020 | January 2022 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17101855 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING FAILURE OF A NETWORK DEVICE | November 2020 | April 2022 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17099241 | HIERARCHICAL NETWORK CONFIGURATION | November 2020 | January 2022 | Allow | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17095452 | THRESHOLD ESTABLISHMENT FOR KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS DERIVED FROM MACHINE DATA | November 2020 | February 2022 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17091447 | UNIVERSAL VISITOR IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM | November 2020 | January 2022 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17089530 | COLLABORATIVE TRAFFIC BALANCER | November 2020 | March 2022 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17079728 | SPATIO-TEMPORAL EVENT WEIGHT ESTIMATION FOR NETWORK-LEVEL AND TOPOLOGY-LEVEL REPRESENTATIONS | October 2020 | January 2022 | Allow | 15 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17077615 | SYSTEM FOR REAL-TIME IMITATION NETWORK GENERATION USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | October 2020 | September 2022 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17072420 | Viral Engine for Network Deployment | October 2020 | May 2022 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17068655 | VISUALIZATION OF PATH BETWEEN LOGICAL NETWORK ENDPOINTS | October 2020 | January 2022 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17013825 | Social Media with Variable Posting Times | September 2020 | March 2022 | Allow | 18 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17001370 | Web Control with Real-Time Content Analysis | August 2020 | April 2022 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17001206 | SERVICE-LEVEL RESILIENCY IN VIRTUALIZATION ENVIRONMENTS | August 2020 | March 2022 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16986500 | Method, Device and System for Ensuring Service Level Agreement of Application | August 2020 | July 2022 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16937057 | DYNAMIC QOS CONTROLLER | July 2020 | December 2022 | Allow | 29 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16935188 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DISPLAYING TEXT AND VIDEO IN TWO THREADS | July 2020 | December 2021 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16933982 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ORGANIZING CONTENT FOR MOBILE MEDIA SERVICES | July 2020 | March 2022 | Abandon | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16916855 | INTERACTIVE SEARCH TRAINING | June 2020 | November 2022 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16917757 | HYPERPARAMETER OPTIMIZATION USING FAIRNESS CONSTRAINTS | June 2020 | June 2022 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 16913612 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR IDENTIFYING TYPE OF VOCODER | June 2020 | May 2022 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 16902510 | PATH SELECTION FOR AN APPLICATION BASED ON A PERFORMANCE SCORE IN A SOFTWARE-DEFINED NETWORK | June 2020 | May 2022 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16895738 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INFERRING A NETWORK TOPOLOGY FROM THE EDGE | June 2020 | December 2021 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16894499 | PROVISIONING RESOURCES FOR ACCESS BY AN UNTRUSTED COMPUTER NETWORK | June 2020 | December 2022 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16892594 | Action Recommendation Engine (ARE) of a closed-loop Machine Learning (ML) system for controlling a network | June 2020 | March 2022 | Allow | 21 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16767419 | CONFIGURATION METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN A NETWORK USING A DYNAMIC ROUTING PROTOCOL | May 2020 | October 2022 | Allow | 29 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16877078 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING THE GENERATION OR DELETION OF RECORD OBJECTS BASED ON ELECTRONIC ACTIVITIES AND COMMUNICATION POLICIES | May 2020 | November 2021 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16863110 | PREDICTION METHOD, TERMINAL, AND SERVER | April 2020 | October 2022 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16821015 | INTEROPERABLE CLOUD BASED MEDIA PROCESSING USING DYNAMIC NETWORK INTERFACE | March 2020 | July 2022 | Allow | 28 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16808896 | COMPRESSED TRANSMISSION OF NETWORK DATA FOR NETWORKING MACHINE LEARNING SYSTEMS | March 2020 | April 2022 | Allow | 26 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16798917 | AUTOMATED GROUPING OF COMPUTING DEVICES IN A NETWORKED DATA STORAGE SYSTEM | February 2020 | April 2022 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16797298 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CLASSIFYING NETWORK TRAFFIC | February 2020 | August 2021 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16792313 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONTENT PROXYING BETWEEN FORMATS | February 2020 | December 2021 | Allow | 22 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16778321 | DYNAMIC USER GROUP MANAGEMENT IN GROUP-BASED COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS | January 2020 | June 2022 | Allow | 28 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16713702 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING CONNECTION SETUP LATENCY | December 2019 | November 2021 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16614829 | BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS SYSTEM, BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | November 2019 | October 2022 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16457475 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING DATA, APPLICATIONS AND INTERNET CONNECTIONS FOR MULTIPLE USERS IN A SHARED COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT LOCATED IN PROXIMITY TO THE USER | June 2019 | November 2021 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16441160 | TECHNIQUES TO GENERATE NETWORK SIMULATION SCENARIOS | June 2019 | February 2022 | Allow | 32 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16235100 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INFERENCE ARCHITECTURE WITH HARDWARE ACCELERATION | December 2018 | February 2022 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15985228 | DEVICE MODEL TEMPLATES | May 2018 | May 2022 | Allow | 48 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 15288002 | METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MASS EMAIL DETECTION AND COLLABORATION | October 2016 | November 2022 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 13788363 | DATA STORAGE SYSTEM | March 2013 | April 2022 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner MIRZA, ADNAN M.
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.
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, 37.5% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.
✓ 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 MIRZA, ADNAN M works in Art Unit 2453 and has examined 41 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 97.6%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 23 months.
Examiner MIRZA, ADNAN M's allowance rate of 97.6% places them in the 88% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by MIRZA, ADNAN M receive 2.05 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 50% 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 MIRZA, ADNAN M is 23 months. This places the examiner in the 84% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +3.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MIRZA, ADNAN M. This interview benefit is in the 27% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 37.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 86% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 38.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 59% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 133.3% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 86% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 77.8% of appeals filed. This is in the 69% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 57.1% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.
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 20% 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.