Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18629845 | RERENDERING A POSITION OF A HAND TO DECREASE A SIZE OF A HAND TO CREATE A REALISTIC VIRTUAL/AUGMENTED REALITY ENVIRONMENT | April 2024 | December 2024 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18621064 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ARRANGING CLOTHING PATTERNS | March 2024 | September 2024 | Allow | 6 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18538798 | OBJECT RENDERING BASED ON COLOR SUPERIMPOSING | December 2023 | September 2024 | Allow | 9 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18523831 | MEDICAL IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS | November 2023 | November 2024 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18206985 | HAIR STYLES SYSTEM FOR RENDERING HAIR STRANDS BASED ON HAIR SPLINE DATA | June 2023 | August 2024 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18050197 | Automatic Text Legibility Improvement within Graphic Designs | October 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17971882 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DISPLAYING FACIAL EXPRESSION IN VIRTUAL SCENE | October 2022 | January 2025 | Allow | 27 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17938617 | PROCESSOR DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME FOR DISPLAY OF LESION INFORMATION | October 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17930058 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VISUALIZING ANATOMICAL STRUCTURE OF PATIENT DURING SURGERY | September 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 27 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17857815 | Real Estate Buyer Registry | July 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17662055 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AIDING NON-CONTACT DETECTOR PLACEMENT IN NON-CONTACT PATIENT MONITORING SYSTEMS | May 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17753981 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DISPLAYING EGO-VEHICLE SURROUNDINGS WITHIN AN EGO-VEHICLE WITH SUPPORT OF ELECTRICAL CHARGING | March 2022 | January 2025 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17691329 | IMAGE GENERATION METHOD AND INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE | March 2022 | January 2025 | Abandon | 34 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17688605 | SELECTIVE AND ADJUSTABLE MIXED REALITY OVERLAY IN SURGICAL FIELD VIEW | March 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17678384 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CREATING THREE-DIMENSIONAL RENDERINGS OF ENVIRONMENTS FROM TWO-DIMENSIONAL IMAGES | February 2022 | January 2024 | Abandon | 23 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17611960 | INFORMATION PRESENTATION APPARATUS, METHOD, AND PROGRAM | November 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 37 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17454815 | APPARATUS, METHOD AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM FOR DETERMINING THE PRESENCE OF STRES IN A USER OF A DISPLAY AND ADJUSTING THE DISPLAY | November 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 35 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17393981 | ROBOT SURGICAL PLATFORM | August 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17418598 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD FOR REPRODUCTION OF 3D OBJECTS | June 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17288681 | A MIRROR ASSEMBLY | April 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 39 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17206991 | AUGMENTED REALITY BASED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN MULTIPLE USERS | March 2021 | July 2024 | Allow | 40 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16900500 | DATA SERIALIZATION EXTRUSION FOR CONVERTING TWO-DIMENSIONAL IMAGES TO THREE-DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRY | June 2020 | July 2023 | Abandon | 37 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16861100 | LIVE IN-CAMERA OVERLAYS | April 2020 | December 2024 | Allow | 55 | 10 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16861097 | NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING FOR VISUAL TAGGING | April 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 54 | 8 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16532321 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR FEW-SHOT TRANSFER LEARNING | August 2019 | July 2025 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 15998878 | Expert knowledge platform | August 2018 | July 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15663691 | SELECTIVE REDUCTION OF BLUE LIGHT IN A DISPLAY FRAME | July 2017 | July 2019 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15616827 | DISPLAY APPARATUS AND DISPLAY CONTROL METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUSLY DISPLAYING A PLURALITY OF IMAGES | June 2017 | January 2019 | Allow | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15209758 | METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR 3D IMAGING AND CUSTOM MANUFACTURING | July 2016 | March 2018 | Abandon | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15155488 | SYSTEM FOR DISTRIBUTING AND CONTROLLING COLOR REPRODUCTION AT MULTIPLE SITES | May 2016 | October 2017 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 15131273 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR BIOMECHANICALLY-BASED EYE SIGNALS FOR INTERACTING WITH REAL AND VIRTUAL OBJECTS | April 2016 | November 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14535543 | PROJECTED CONTENT BASED DISPLAY DEVICE AND DISPLAY METHOD | November 2014 | January 2020 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13942467 | PATTERNED PROJECTION WITH MULTI-PANEL DISPLAY | July 2013 | June 2016 | Allow | 35 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13978952 | GRAY-SCALE CORRECTION METHOD FOR DISPLAY DEVICE, AND METHOD OF PRODUCING DISPLAY DEVICE | July 2013 | June 2015 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13978659 | TEXTURE MAPPING DEVICE | July 2013 | September 2015 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13936867 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PRODUCING A THREE-DIMENSIONAL FACE MODEL | July 2013 | October 2017 | Allow | 51 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13049998 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING IMAGES OF A VIRTUAL WORLD SCENE AND METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROCESSING THE SAME | March 2011 | May 2014 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13050443 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A THUMBNAIL IMAGE INCLUDING A MAGNIFIED CHARACTERISTIC REGION AND ANOTHER DEFORMED REGION AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM THEREOF | March 2011 | August 2014 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13049959 | METHOD FOR GENERATING LOOKUP TABLE FOR COLOR CORRECTION FOR DISPLAY DEVICE | March 2011 | November 2013 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12761756 | IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD | April 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12761322 | TERMINAL DEVICE INCLUDING A THREE-DIMENSIONAL CAPABLE DISPLAY | April 2010 | May 2014 | Allow | 49 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12662287 | Image processing apparatus performing rendering using multiple viewpoints and method | April 2010 | February 2014 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 12730134 | System and Method for Generating a Three-Dimensional Image on a Pre-Printed Lined Substrate | March 2010 | July 2014 | Allow | 52 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12606559 | CONTROLLING ANIMATION FRAME RATE OF APPLICATIONS | October 2009 | July 2013 | Allow | 44 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 12462938 | THREE-DIMENSIONAL TACTICAL DISPLAY AND METHOD FOR VISUALIZING DATA WITH A PROBABILITY OF UNCERTAINTY | August 2009 | February 2016 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 12423769 | ADJUSTING THE DISPLAY ORIENTATION OF AN IMAGE ON A MOBILE TERMINAL | April 2009 | June 2013 | Allow | 50 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12266870 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENCODING DATASTREAM INCLUDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON MULTIVIEW IMAGE AND METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DECODING DATASTREAM BY USING THE SAME | November 2008 | June 2014 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12169081 | COREGISTRATION AND ANALYSIS OF MULTI-MODAL IMAGES OBTAINED IN DIFFERENT GEOMETRIES | July 2008 | June 2015 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HE, WEIMING.
With a 50.0% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. This reversal rate is above the USPTO average, indicating that appeals have better success here than typical.
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.
✓ 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 HE, WEIMING works in Art Unit 2615 and has examined 46 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 65.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.
Examiner HE, WEIMING's allowance rate of 65.2% places them in the 18% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by HE, WEIMING receive 3.33 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 98% 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 HE, WEIMING is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 14% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -13.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HE, WEIMING. This interview benefit is in the 1% 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, 18.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 10% 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 16.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 12% 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, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 8% 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 42.9% of appeals filed. This is in the 6% percentile among all examiners. 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, 90.9% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 95% 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 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 22% 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.