Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18766404 | Method For Wireless Event-Driven Everything-to-Everything (X2X) Payload Delivery | July 2024 | January 2025 | Allow | 7 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18045560 | NON-TERRESTRIAL NETWORK CONNECTION MANAGEMENT | October 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17995782 | METHOD FOR SIDELINK COMMUNICATION IN NR V2X BY TERMINAL IN WHICH NR MODULE AND LTE MODULE COEXIST | October 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17634870 | TERMINAL | February 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17597299 | METHODS AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR DETERMINING PARAMETERS OF BURSTS FOR DATA FLOW TRANSMISSION IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORK BASED ON CHANNEL QUALITY | December 2021 | January 2026 | Allow | 49 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17528109 | METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR COORDINATING DATA TRANSMISSION IN A COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK | November 2021 | November 2025 | Allow | 48 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17502031 | CABLE NETWORK REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY PLANNING METHOD AND APPARATUS | October 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17602309 | METHOD FOR OPERATING UE IN ASSOCIATION WITH DETECTION OF LOST MESSAGE IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | October 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17436982 | METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR DUPLICATION COMMUNICATION | September 2021 | February 2026 | Allow | 53 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17412438 | Identifying Transient Blockage | August 2021 | July 2024 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17405449 | INTERLEAVER DESIGN FOR NONCOHERENT REED MULLER CODES | August 2021 | November 2025 | Allow | 51 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17423322 | NETWORK NODE AND METHOD PERFORMED THEREIN FOR HANDLING BASEBAND RESOURCES | July 2021 | January 2025 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17348496 | TRANSPORT BLOCK GROUPING FOR HIGHER BANDS | June 2021 | December 2024 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17289706 | RESOURCE INDICATION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE | April 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17212932 | METHOD FOR CAPABILITY AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION, TERMINAL DEVICE, AND CONTROL DEVICE | March 2021 | November 2025 | Allow | 55 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 17267730 | COMMUNICATION METHOD AND COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE | February 2021 | December 2025 | Allow | 58 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17114304 | ARCHITECTURE FOR SMART SWITCH CENTERED NEXT GENERATION CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE | December 2020 | September 2025 | Abandon | 57 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner ALAWDI, SHEHAB A works in Art Unit 2466 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 84.6%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 48 months.
Examiner ALAWDI, SHEHAB A's allowance rate of 84.6% places them in the 60% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by ALAWDI, SHEHAB A receive 2.92 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 85% 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 ALAWDI, SHEHAB A is 48 months. This places the examiner in the 8% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +18.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ALAWDI, SHEHAB A. This interview benefit is in the 60% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
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 15.4% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 17% 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 file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 2% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 16% 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.