Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18980223 | Data Signal Transmission in a Wireless Communication System with Reduced End-To-End Latency | December 2024 | March 2025 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18748005 | LOW LATENCY SOLUTIONS FOR RESTRICTED TARGET WAKE TIME (R-TWT) DURING MULTI-LINK OPERATION (MLO) | June 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 11 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18742552 | TIME-DELIMITED ACTION SUGGESTION SYSTEM | June 2024 | February 2025 | Allow | 8 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18662036 | PHYSICAL DOWNLINK CONTROL CHANNEL (PDCCH) MONITORING WITH OVERLAPPING RESOURCES | May 2024 | December 2024 | Allow | 7 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18486942 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR VIRTUAL INTERFACES AND ADVANCED SMART ROUTING IN A GLOBAL VIRTUAL NETWORK | October 2023 | March 2025 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18480277 | VIRTUALIZED RADIO ACCESS NETWORK (VRAN) DECODING AS A SERVICE | October 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18334715 | CONFIGURATION RESET METHOD AND APPARATUS, AND TERMINAL DEVICE | June 2023 | March 2025 | Allow | 21 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18312517 | Data Signal Transmission in a Wireless Communication System with Reduced End-To-End Latency | May 2023 | March 2025 | Allow | 22 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18138460 | RELEASING WIRELESS DEVICE CONTEXT | April 2023 | February 2025 | Allow | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17983471 | Discontinuous Reception Operation of Multicast and Broadcast Services | November 2022 | March 2025 | Allow | 28 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17950129 | DEVICE TO DEVICE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | September 2022 | May 2025 | Allow | 32 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17788858 | Association with a Network Data Analytics Function | June 2022 | April 2025 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17846712 | MULTIPATH GEOGRAPHIC ROUTING PROTOCOL | June 2022 | June 2025 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17701442 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONFIGURING CSI REPORTING GRANULARITY | March 2022 | July 2025 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17635811 | METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING/RECEIVING DOWNLINK INFORMATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM SUPPORTING INTERNET OF THINGS, AND DEVICE THEREFOR | February 2022 | February 2025 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17593492 | Network Data Scheduling and Transmission for Reduced Capability UEs | September 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17199198 | RESOURCE ALLOCATION FOR SIDELINK-ASSISTED UPLINK TRANSMISSION | March 2021 | April 2025 | Allow | 49 | 8 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17169121 | MULTIPLE ACCESS TRANSMISSION CONFIGURATIONS | February 2021 | June 2025 | Allow | 53 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17156231 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING WIRELESS COMMUNICATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM SUPPORTING VEHICLE COMMUNICATION | January 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 49 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 15005657 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BLIND DETECTING A TRANSMISSION MODE FOR INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION | January 2016 | April 2018 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14328142 | CONFIGURING ETHERNET ELEMENTS VIA ETHERNET LOCAL MANAGEMENT INTERFACE | July 2014 | January 2016 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14217994 | WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE USING COMMON CONTROL CHANNEL AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD USING THE SAME | March 2014 | November 2015 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13608677 | SINGLE FREQUENCY SYNTHESIZER BASED FDD TRANSCEIVER | September 2012 | October 2015 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13499645 | METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING COMP FEEDBACK INFORMATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND TERMINAL APPARATUS | March 2012 | February 2014 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13380746 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING A MODULATION AND CODING SCHEME IN A BROADBAND WIRELESS ACCESS SYSTEM | December 2011 | March 2014 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PATEL, PARTHKUMAR.
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.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner PATEL, PARTHKUMAR works in Art Unit 2479 and has examined 21 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 28 months.
Examiner PATEL, PARTHKUMAR's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 98% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by PATEL, PARTHKUMAR receive 2.24 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 76% 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 PATEL, PARTHKUMAR is 28 months. This places the examiner in the 51% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PATEL, PARTHKUMAR. This interview benefit is in the 11% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 26.9% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 35% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 41% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 7% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 89% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 83% 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'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 19% 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.