USPTO Examiner LE BRIAN T - Art Unit 2479

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19031298METHOD FOR GENERATING HARQ-ACK CODEBOOK IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND DEVICE USING SAMEJanuary 2025October 2025Allow900YesNo
19016765INTELLIGENT MONITORING SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR WI-FI METRIC-BASED PREDICTIONS FOR CLOUD BASED WI-FI NETWORKSJanuary 2025February 2026Allow1410YesNo
19011967INTELLIGENT MONITORING SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR WI-FI METRIC-BASED ALARMS FOR CLOUD BASED WI-FI NETWORKSJanuary 2025February 2026Allow1410YesNo
18580083METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR PUSCH REPETITION TRANSMISSIONSJanuary 2024January 2026Allow2400NoNo
18565782TERMINAL APPARATUS, BASE STATION APPARATUS, AND METHOD THAT ENABLE EFFICIENT CONTROL OF MSB BY USING NRNovember 2023March 2026Allow2700NoNo
18519672INTELLIGENT MONITORING SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CLOUD-BASED WI-FINovember 2023October 2025Allow2210YesNo
18514585EARLY FRAME CHECK SEQUENCE (FCS) FOR TRIGGER FRAME VALIDATIONNovember 2023February 2026Allow2720NoNo
18554328METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING/RECEIVING WIRELESS SIGNAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMOctober 2023October 2025Allow2400YesNo
18329158METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DYNAMIC SIGNALING OF INDICATED TCI STATES TO RECEIVE PDSCH IN M-TRPJune 2023December 2025Allow3010NoNo
18155417Methods and Apparatus for Resource Sharing in the SidelinkJanuary 2023October 2025Allow3310NoNo
18016147RADIO RESOURCE CONFIGURATION FOR POWER SAVINGJanuary 2023October 2025Allow3310YesNo
18005024DESIGN OF NR SIDELINK TRANSMISSION GAPJanuary 2023October 2025Allow3300YesNo
18091494COMMUNICATION METHOD, APPARATUS AND DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUMDecember 2022February 2026Allow3710YesNo
17999536SLOT IDENTIFICATION FOR SEMI-PERSISTENT SCHEDULING (SPS) AND CONFIGURED GRANT TRANSMISSIONSNovember 2022March 2026Allow4020YesNo
17917575ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR USE IN RADIO COMMUNICATION, METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM INCLUDING AN ADJUSTMENT OF CONTENTION WINDOW SIZEOctober 2022April 2025Allow3010YesNo
17960912QUASI CO-LOCATED RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT METHOD AND APPARATUSOctober 2022December 2025Allow3820NoNo
17960518SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF COORDINATED SERVICE PERIODS FOR WIFIOctober 2022March 2025Allow3010YesNo
17945866VERY SHORT-RANGE HIGH-SPEED FULL-DUPLEX WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONSSeptember 2022February 2026Allow4130YesNo
17861001ALLOCATING A PLURALITY OF RESOURCE ALLOCATION UNITS TO A STATION BY USING ONE OR MORE USER INFORMATION FIELDSJuly 2022January 2025Allow3040YesNo
17804747REPEATER MEASUREMENT GAP CONFIGURATIONMay 2022January 2026Allow4430YesNo
17804208SIDELINK OUT OF CHANNEL OCCUPANCY TIME RESERVATIONMay 2022October 2025Allow4020YesNo
17738975UPLINK DEMODULATION REFERENCE SIGNAL BUNDLING MODESMay 2022October 2025Allow4110YesNo
17714551METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MANAGING RAN NODES IN A COMMUNICATION NETWORKApril 2022December 2025Allow4411YesNo
17709855CONTROL OF WIRELESS CONNECTIVITY BASED ON LATENCYMarch 2022February 2025Allow3520YesNo
17672329POWER REDUCTION AND SCALING FOR MULTI-CARRIER WIRELESS TERMINALSFebruary 2022January 2026Allow4760YesNo
17549297METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CHANNEL OCCUPANCY TIME SHARING IN SIDELINK COMMUNICATIONDecember 2021December 2025Allow4840YesNo
17224983ASSISTED SENSING FOR SIDELINK RESOURCE SELECTIONApril 2021March 2026Allow5920NoYes
16444859SYNCHRONIZATION SIGNAL SENDING METHOD AND APPARATUSJune 2019June 2020Allow1200YesNo
16051514UPLINK CONTROL INFORMATION TRANSMISSION METHOD AND APPARATUSAugust 2018January 2020Allow1800YesNo
15773023METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ENHANCING SERVICE IN COMMUNICATION SYSTEM SUPPORTING PUBLIC SAFETY NETWORK SERVICEMay 2018April 2020Allow2320YesNo
15738429NETWORK CONNECTION METHOD OF TERMINAL USING VIRTUAL UE SYSTEMDecember 2017September 2019Allow2100YesNo
14913467METHOD FOR ESTABLISHING WLAN BY MOBILE TERMINAL, AND MOBILE TERMINALFebruary 2016May 2017Allow1510YesNo
14855136SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND ARTICLES OF MANUFACTURE TO DETERMINE CONNECTIVITYSeptember 2015January 2016Allow400YesNo
14113786BASE STATION AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFOctober 2013October 2016Allow3530YesNo
14113545BASE STATION AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFOctober 2013October 2016Allow3530YesNo
14006960ROBUST DOWNLINK TIMING SYNCHRONIZATION METHOD IN LTE SYSTEMSeptember 2013April 2015Allow1800YesNo
13922842APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING A FORMAT OF A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION CHANNEL BASED ON A HANDOVER STATEJune 2013October 2015Allow2720YesNo
13708589SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND ARTICLES OF MANUFACTURE TO DETERMINE CONNECTIVITYDecember 2012July 2015Allow3110YesNo
13660822METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR UPDATING EXTENDED ACCESS BARRING INFORMATIONOctober 2012March 2014Allow1700NoNo
13551894Method And Apparatus For Selecting A Wireless Access PointJuly 2012January 2016Allow4220YesNo
13417988METHOD FOR ACCESSING HYBRID NETWORK, AND GATEWAY APPARATUS, WIRELESS TERMINAL AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM THEREOFMarch 2012August 2013Allow1700YesNo
12936974METHOD FOR PERFORMING HARQ OPERATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMJuly 2011March 2014Allow4220YesNo
12966299METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING MULTIPLE REGISTRATION PROTOCOL (MRP) SCOPE USING MRP POLICIESDecember 2010March 2015Allow5120YesYes
12892900EXCHANGE MECHANISMS FOR DIGITAL INFORMATION PACKAGES WITH BANDWIDTH SECURITIZATION, MULTICHANNEL DIGITAL WATERMARKS, AND KEY MANAGEMENTSeptember 2010February 2014Allow4111YesNo
12884389IMPLEMENTING LANE SHUFFLE FOR FAULT-TOLERANT COMMUNICATION LINKSSeptember 2010March 2014Allow4210YesNo
12694583METHOD FOR PRUNING PERIMETER WALKS IN DATA-CENTRIC STORAGE SENSOR NETWORKSJanuary 2010November 2012Allow3410YesNo
12694158RADIO BASE STATION APPARATUS AND SYNCHRONIZATION METHOD THEREOFJanuary 2010December 2012Allow3510YesNo
12470139PERIODIC RANGING IN A WIRELESS ACCESS SYSTEM FOR MOBILE STATION IN SLEEP MODEMay 2009January 2012Allow3210YesNo
12470339PERIODIC RANGING IN A WIRELESS ACCESS SYSTEM FOR MOBILE STATION IN SLEEP MODEMay 2009September 2012Allow4010YesNo
12469008INFORMATION SERVICE APPARATUS AND METHOD IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMMay 2009January 2014Allow5630YesNo
12469180RECEIVING APPARATUS AND RECEIVING METHODMay 2009November 2012Allow4230YesNo
12363037METHOD FOR CONTROLLING UPLINK LOAD IN CELL_FACH STATEJanuary 2009March 2013Allow4920YesNo
12256131MULTIPLEXED COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND MULTIPLEXED COMMUNICATION METHODOctober 2008December 2012Allow5020YesNo
12129758BASE STATION OF MOBILE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMMay 2008April 2013Allow5940YesNo
12129007MEDIUM ACCESS CONTROL METHOD AND DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD USING THE SAME IN WIRELESS LOCAL AREA NETWORKMay 2008June 2012Allow4920YesNo
12127838PULL-BASED DATA TRANSMISSION APPROACHMay 2008June 2012Allow4920YesNo
12064808COMMUNICATION RESOURCE ALLOCATION METHOD OF BASE STATIONFebruary 2008February 2012Allow4821YesNo
12071153SYMMETRICAL COOPERATIVE DIVERSITY IN THE RELAY-ENABLED WIRELESS SYSTEMSFebruary 2008December 2013Allow6040YesNo

Appeals Overview

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
93.4%
Higher than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
96.6%
Higher 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, 100.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Strategic Recommendations

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 LE, BRIAN T - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner LE, BRIAN T works in Art Unit 2479 and has examined 33 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 40 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner LE, BRIAN T's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 95% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by LE, BRIAN T receive 1.64 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 32% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by LE, BRIAN T is 40 months. This places the examiner in the 24% 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 +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LE, BRIAN T. This interview benefit is in the 14% 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, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 72% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 40.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 61% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 100.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 72% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 49% 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 shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.

Petition Practice

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 Cooperation and Flexibility

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 21% 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:

  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.