USPTO Examiner MARTELLO EDWARD - Art Unit 2611

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19307286Systems and Methods for Loss Weighted Image Sampling for Non-Uniform Splat GenerationAugust 2025October 2025Allow200NoNo
19056609DEVICES, METHODS, AND GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES FOR INTERACTING WITH THREE-DIMENSIONAL ENVIRONMENTSFebruary 2025August 2025Allow610YesNo
18780500Location-based Augmented Reality MethodJuly 2024February 2026Allow1900NoNo
18773132EXPO FLOOR LAYOUTJuly 2024June 2025Allow1110NoNo
18610861ONE-CLICK IMAGE EXTENSION WITH QUICK MASK ADJUSTMENTMarch 2024February 2026Allow2310YesNo
18602983SHAPE AND POSE ESTIMATION FOR OBJECT PLACEMENTMarch 2024November 2025Allow2000NoNo
18583041METHOD FOR DISPLAYING LIVE-STREAMING VIRTUAL RESOURCE AND TERMINALFebruary 2024March 2026Abandon2410NoNo
18410541GENERATING THREE-DIMENSIONAL POINT CLOUDS AND DEPTH MAPS OF OBJECTS WITHIN DIGITAL IMAGES UTILIZING HEIGHT MAPS AND PERSPECTIVE FIELD REPRESENTATIONSJanuary 2024February 2026Allow2510YesNo
18400064OPTICAL LINK SUPPORTING DISPLAY PORTDecember 2023November 2025Allow2310NoNo
18394783METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR OPTIMIZING AN IMAGE GENERATORDecember 2023October 2025Allow2200NoNo
18572253IMMERSIVE REALITY METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR A HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCEDecember 2023March 2026Allow2710NoNo
18537502SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIAGNOSTIC IMAGINGDecember 2023February 2026Allow2610YesNo
18511692SEGMENTATION FREE GUIDANCE IN DIFFUSION MODELSNovember 2023December 2025Allow2510YesNo
18509647METHOD OF GENERATING A HUMAN MODEL AND DEVICE THEREFORNovember 2023September 2025Allow2200NoNo
18498768SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SUBJECT-DRIVEN IMAGE GENERATIONOctober 2023September 2025Allow2310NoNo
18384975ENDOSCOPE SYSTEM, LUMEN STRUCTURE CALCULATION SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR CREATING LUMEN STRUCTURE INFORMATIONOctober 2023March 2026Allow2810NoNo
18557349COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A VIRTUAL AVATAROctober 2023December 2025Allow2510NoNo
18477938VIDEO PLAYBACK RECOGNITION APPARATUS AND METHODSeptember 2023January 2026Allow2810NoNo
18467622SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING ANNOTATED THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODELS FOR OUTPUT BASED ON AN INPUT IMAGESeptember 2023September 2025Allow2400NoNo
18243966ANALYZER AND DISPLAY METHODSeptember 2023August 2025Allow2300NoNo
18238749GEOLOCATION-BASED BACKGROUND GENERATION FOR OBJECT IMAGESAugust 2023July 2025Allow2200NoNo
18547865SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VIRTUAL INTERACTIONAugust 2023October 2025Allow2610NoNo
18262727Systems And Methods For Retrieving Information Associated With Contents Of A Container Using Augmented RealityJuly 2023December 2025Allow2910NoNo
18358228REMOTE REPRODUCTION METHOD, SYSTEM, AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, MEDIUM, AND PROGRAM PRODUCTJuly 2023December 2025Allow2810YesNo
18338980SIMILAR CONTENT AUGMENTATIONS SYSTEMJune 2023December 2025Allow3010YesNo
18337965DIFFUSION MODEL IMAGE CROPPINGJune 2023October 2025Allow2810YesNo
18328468PRESENTATION OF MEDIA CONTENT AS MEMORIESJune 2023October 2025Allow2810YesNo
18199863METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUSLY SCANNING AND CONSTRUCTING A REPRESENTATION OF A STAND OF TREESMay 2023June 2025Allow2500NoNo
18251743VOLUMETRIC PERFORMANCE CAPTURE WITH NEURAL RENDERINGMay 2023July 2025Allow2710NoNo
18304181PRODUCT IMAGE GENERATION BASED ON DIFFUSION MODELApril 2023July 2025Allow2710YesNo
18190634IMAGE PROCESSING WITH SINGLE INTERPOLATION OPERATION FOR DE-MOSAICING AND WARPINGMarch 2023June 2025Allow2710NoNo
18119804System and Method for Efficient and Fast Creation of Animated MMS Images for Use Within SMS MarketingMarch 2023September 2025Allow3010YesNo
18179717HAND SURFACE NORMAL ESTIMATIONMarch 2023April 2025Allow2610YesNo
18172428SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SURGICAL TOOL BASED MODEL FUSIONFebruary 2023April 2025Allow2620NoNo
17944542MERGING ATOMICS TO THE SAME CACHE LINESeptember 2022February 2026Allow4110NoNo
16568167METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR GENERATING 3D INFORMATIONSeptember 2019January 2021Allow1610NoNo
16488788METHOD OF GENERATING AN IMAGE FILE OF A 3D BODY MODEL OF A USER WEARING A GARMENTAugust 2019December 2020Allow1610NoNo
16439343ISOGEOMETRIC ANALYSIS AND COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN USING S-SPLINESJune 2019June 2020Allow1200NoNo
16010190VIRTUAL GENERATION OF LABELED MOTION SENSOR DATAJune 2018January 2020Allow1910YesNo
15799014System and Method for Automatically Generating IllustrationsOctober 2017July 2019Allow2120YesNo
15686473METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CALIBRATING A COLOR DISPLAYAugust 2017February 2018Allow610NoNo
15651904INDICATING THE GEOGRAPHIC ORIGIN OF A DIGITALLY-MEDIATED COMMUNICATIONJuly 2017September 2019Allow2630YesNo
15356247METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CALIBRATING A COLOR DISPLAYNovember 2016May 2017Allow610YesNo
15108704Tri-Cubic and Hybrid Interpolation in a 3D Texture ShaderJune 2016April 2019Allow3430YesYes
14997342APPROACH TO VISUALIZE CURRENT AND HISTORICAL ACCESS POLICY OF A GROUP BASED POLICYJanuary 2016September 2018Allow3220YesNo
14769649A DEVICE FOR DISPLAYING A TREND RELATED TO A PROCESS VARIABLEAugust 2015November 2016Allow1500NoNo
14790349GAMING SYSTEM LEVERAGING PHYSICAL POLYHEDRON WITH M FACES ROTATIONALLY LINKED TO ORDERED DATA SET OF N ELEMENTSJuly 2015August 2017Allow2500NoNo
14728558FREELY ROTATABLE PHYSICAL OBJECT WITH MULTIPLE FACES COMMUNICATING ROTATION INFORMATION TO A DATA HANDLING SYSTEMJune 2015April 2017Allow2301YesNo
14671903INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, MEASUREMENT SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR DETERMINING AT LEAST ONE MEASUREMENT CONDITION TO MEASURE REFLECTION CHARACTERISTICS OF AN OBJECT WHICH IS TO BE USED TO GENERATE A VIRTUAL IMAGEMarch 2015August 2017Allow2930NoNo
14541224User Interface with Color Themes based on Input Image DataNovember 2014September 2016Allow2210NoNo
14195334METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CALIBRATING A COLOR DISPLAYMarch 2014July 2016Allow2820YesNo
14133776Dynamic Waveform Region EnhancementDecember 2013September 2015Allow2100NoNo
14033594STEREOSCOPIC IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE AND STEREOSCOPIC IMAGE PROCESSING METHODSeptember 2013February 2015Allow1720YesNo
13944159SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR HISTOGRAM COMPUTATION USING A GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNITJuly 2013February 2014Allow710NoNo
13891327IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHODMay 2013November 2015Allow3120NoNo
13829900PATCHED SHADING IN GRAPHICS PROCESSINGMarch 2013September 2018Allow6080YesNo
13577895METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DISPLAY OF OBJECTS IN 3DDecember 2012August 2014Allow2520NoNo
13631866SHADER SERIALIZATION AND INSTANCE UNROLLINGSeptember 2012April 2015Allow3110NoNo
13568304ROTATING AN N-SIDED OBJECT TO NAVIGATE ITEMS OF AN ORDERED DATA SETAugust 2012January 2015Allow3001NoNo
13491930METHOD AND MECHANISM FOR PERFORMING BOTH SERVER-SIDE AND CLIENT-SIDE RENDERING OF VISUAL DATAJune 2012September 2015Allow3920YesNo
13303185Three Dimensional Building BlocksNovember 2011March 2016Allow5240NoNo
13217754DISPLAYING EXTRACTED STRUCTURES FROM AN OCT IMAGE SUPERIMPOSED ON AN EYEGROUND IMAGEAugust 2011December 2014Allow3920NoNo
13109973DEPTH ESTIMATION SYSTEM FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL IMAGES AND METHOD OF OPERATION THEREOFMay 2011June 2015Allow4940YesNo
13108613GETTING SNAPSHOTS IN IMMERSIBLE 3D SCENE RECORDING IN VIRTUAL WORLDMay 2011April 2014Allow3510NoNo
13061270TECHNIQUES TO SUPPRESS NOISES IN AN IMAGE TO PRECISELY EXTRACT SHAPES AND EDGESMay 2011March 2015Allow4820YesNo
13038168CONVERSION BETWEEN Z-SCANNING INDICES, RASTER-SCANNING INDICES AND 2-D COORDINATES USING SIMPLE BIT-OPERATIONS IN HEVCMarch 2011August 2014Allow4220NoNo
13026435METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING A THREE-DIMENSIONAL PREVIEW OF A FINISHED DOCUMENTFebruary 2011June 2014Allow4010YesNo
13000096SEMICONDUCTOR INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE, FACILITY APPLIANCE CONTROL DEVICE, AND APPLIANCE STATE DISPLAY APPARATUSDecember 2010April 2014Allow4021YesYes
12956227IMAGE PROCESSING FOR CONTROLLING DISPARITY IN 3D IMAGESNovember 2010November 2013Allow3620YesNo
12946704SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING ENHANCED GRAPHICS IN A VIDEO ENVIRONMENTNovember 2010August 2014Allow4540YesNo
12868109BACKGROUND REPLACEMENT FOR VIDEOCONFERENCINGAugust 2010April 2014Allow4430YesNo
12769907ANIMATING A VIRTUAL OBJECT WITHIN A VIRTUAL WORLDApril 2010June 2015Allow6040YesNo
12770212HIERARCHICAL MESH QUANTIZATION THAT FACILITATES EFFICIENT RAY TRACINGApril 2010October 2013Allow4210NoNo
12724093APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CREATING ANIMATION FROM WEB TEXTMarch 2010April 2014Allow4930YesNo
12642374PRIORITY ORDERED USER INTERFACE SCREENS FOR CONTROLLING A DEVICEDecember 2009September 2013Allow4520YesNo
12326221RENDERING AVATAR DETAILSDecember 2008November 2014Allow6070YesNo
12125793APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PERFORMING COLOR CONVERSION BASED ON VIEWING CONDITIONSMay 2008March 2014Allow6060YesNo
11502233Adaptive spatial variant interpolation for image upscalingAugust 2006August 2014Allow6040YesYes
11393404Color enhancement technique using skin color detectionMarch 2006May 2015Allow6080NoYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner MARTELLO, EDWARD.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
1
(33.3%)
Examiner Reversed
2
(66.7%)
Reversal Percentile
86.4%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 66.7% 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
4
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
79.2%
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, 50.0% 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 MARTELLO, EDWARD - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MARTELLO, EDWARD works in Art Unit 2611 and has examined 44 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 34 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MARTELLO, EDWARD'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 MARTELLO, EDWARD receive 2.30 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 65% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MARTELLO, EDWARD is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 43% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MARTELLO, EDWARD. 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, 31.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 64% 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 13.6% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 14% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

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 9% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 57.1% of appeals filed. This is in the 30% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 25.0% 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 3% 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 18% 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 23% 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 RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.

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.