Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18869868 | OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR DIGITAL HOLOGRAPHY | November 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18822032 | AUGMENTED SUPERSTEREOSCOPIC DISPLAY | August 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18594340 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DERIVING INTRA PREDICTION MODE | March 2024 | July 2025 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18340411 | MIRROR MONITOR USING TWO LEVELS OF REFLECTIVITY AND TRANSMISSIBILITY | June 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18308927 | Packet Sending Method, Device, and System | April 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18295643 | TECHNIQUE FOR DEFINING FEATURES AND PREDICTING LIKELIHOOD OF ADOPTION OF THE SAME USING MACHINE LEARNING MODELS | April 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 33 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17721760 | APPARATUS, SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR SELECTIVELY COMPENSATING FOR CORRECTIVE LENSES APPLIED TO DISPLAY DEVICES DURING TESTING | April 2022 | September 2024 | Abandon | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17682018 | MOTION-COMPENSATED COMPRESSION OF DYNAMIC VOXELIZED POINT CLOUDS | February 2022 | September 2025 | Allow | 43 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16895725 | AUTOMATIC NARRATION OF SIGNAL SEGMENT | June 2020 | February 2022 | Abandon | 21 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16758732 | IMAGE DECODING METHOD AND DEVICE USING ROTATION PARAMETERS IN IMAGE CODING SYSTEM FOR 360-DEGREE VIDEO | April 2020 | June 2021 | Abandon | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16597216 | System and Process for Mobile Object Tracking | October 2019 | July 2021 | Allow | 21 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16431683 | DUAL-CAMERA APPARATUS FOR DERIVING DIMENSIONAL MEASUREMENTS AND METHOD OF PERSONALIZING LENS SELECTION | June 2019 | July 2025 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16288262 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING MEDICAL IMAGE DATA ONTO PORTABLE DIGITAL RECORDING MEDIA | February 2019 | February 2020 | Abandon | 12 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16201597 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENHANCING HUMAN MEMORY RECOLLECTION AND CATALOGING THROUGH AN AUTOGENERATED VIDEO JOURNAL | November 2018 | May 2020 | Abandon | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16159171 | Display Control Device, Recording Control Device, And Display Control Method | October 2018 | August 2020 | Abandon | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16110629 | AUTOMATIC PLAYBACK OVERSHOOT CORRECTION SYSTEM | August 2018 | April 2020 | Abandon | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16033147 | CONTROL METHOD FOR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM | July 2018 | February 2020 | Abandon | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16016724 | SYSTEM OF AUTOMATED SCRIPT GENERATION WITH INTEGRATED VIDEO PRODUCTION | June 2018 | August 2020 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15989780 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LIVE VIDEO PRODUCTION MONITORING AND ANNOTATION | May 2018 | February 2020 | Abandon | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15922008 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LIVE VIDEO PRODUCTION MONITORING AND ANNOTATION | March 2018 | February 2020 | Abandon | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15860471 | Method and System for Real-time Rendering Displaying Virtual Reality (VR) On Mobile Using Head-Up Display Devices | January 2018 | February 2021 | Abandon | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15793997 | Parcel Delivery Assistance and Parcel Theft Deterrence for Audio/Video Recording and Communication Devices | October 2017 | April 2020 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15702954 | SURVEILLANCE FLAG POLE | September 2017 | January 2021 | Abandon | 40 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15677041 | Method for Recording Vehicle Driving Information and Creating Vehicle Record by Utilizing Digital Video Shooting | August 2017 | October 2020 | Abandon | 38 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 13472601 | APPARATUS FOR RECORDING AND REPRODUCING VIDEO CONTENT | May 2012 | August 2014 | Abandon | 27 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13470204 | PLAYBACK APPARATUS, PROGRAM, AND PLAYBACK METHOD | May 2012 | May 2014 | Abandon | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13421019 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EFFECTIVELY ENCODING AND DECODING A WIDE-AREA NETWORK BASED REMOTE PRESENTATION SESSION | March 2012 | December 2014 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13418344 | Block-matching Motion Estimation Method and Apparatus | March 2012 | March 2015 | Abandon | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13415901 | Interpolation Filter Selection Using Prediction Index | March 2012 | January 2015 | Abandon | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13270069 | Spatial Intra Prediction Estimation Based on Mode Suppression in Macroblocks of a Video Frame | October 2011 | February 2015 | Abandon | 40 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 13028157 | METHOD FOR ANALYZING PERIPHERAL COMPONENT INTERCONNECT SOCKETS | February 2011 | January 2015 | Abandon | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12848529 | VIDEO RECORDING DEVICES AND VIDEO RECORDING METHODS ALLOWING FOR CONTROLLABLY SWITCHING TO STORE WIRELESSLY RECEIVED VIDEO DATA | August 2010 | June 2014 | Abandon | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 12431055 | RECORDING/REPRODUCING METHOD AND APPARATUS THAT RECORDS INFORMATION ON AN INPUT PICTURE OR SOUNDS AND CONCURRENTLY REPRODUCES RECORDED INFORMATION | April 2009 | May 2014 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 12430233 | INFORMATION RECORD/REPRODUCTION APPARATUS AND INFORMATION RECORD/PLAYBACK METHOD | April 2009 | May 2014 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 11630422 | Moving Image Processing Device, Moving Image Processing Method And Program | April 2007 | March 2014 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 11679023 | Method and System for Presenting Information Relating to Recorded Content | February 2007 | May 2014 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 11151312 | Portable disc player | June 2005 | December 2014 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 10986772 | Recording medium having a data structure for backing up management files and recording and reproducing methods and apparatuses | November 2004 | March 2012 | Abandon | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10754892 | Controlling access to content | January 2004 | October 2015 | Abandon | 60 | 7 | 1 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner VAUGHN JR, WILLIAM C.
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.
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.
⚠ 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 VAUGHN JR, WILLIAM C works in Art Unit 2481 and has examined 31 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 9.7%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 34 months.
Examiner VAUGHN JR, WILLIAM C's allowance rate of 9.7% places them in the 1% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by VAUGHN JR, WILLIAM C receive 2.55 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 74% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by VAUGHN JR, WILLIAM C is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 43% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +29.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by VAUGHN JR, WILLIAM C. This interview benefit is in the 77% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 0.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 1% 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 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 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 16% 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 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.
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 21% 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.