Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18584537 | KERNEL OPTIMIZATION AND DELAYED EXECUTION | February 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 16 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18582311 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ADAPTING EXECUTABLE OBJECT TO A PROCESSING UNIT | February 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 19 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18581251 | Display Tracking Systems and Methods | February 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 25 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18439585 | Animated Image File Generation | February 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18434319 | WAVE THROTTLING BASED ON A PARAMETER BUFFER | February 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 23 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18494840 | METHOD FOR DISPLAYING TRANSITION ANIMATION ON RETRACTABLE SCREEN, NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE | October 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18484373 | Systems and Methods for 3D Data Visualization and Network Extraction | October 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18483972 | GRAPHICS PROCESSING | October 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18361315 | VIRTUAL SPACE SHARING SYSTEM, VIRTUAL SPACE SHARING METHOD, AND VIRTUAL SPACE SHARING PROGRAM | July 2023 | March 2026 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18345406 | PRE-FILTERING WITH ANISOTROPIC FILTER IN DECOUPLED SHADING | June 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 22 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18011161 | TARGET OBJECT DISPLAY METHOD, APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE | June 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18129941 | Display Layout Optimization of Multiple Media Streams | April 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18191978 | Reprojection method of generating reprojected image data, XR projection system, and machine-learning circuit | March 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18118683 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING PAST AND FUTURE CYCLES OF SCENES THAT EMPLOY LOOPING FUNCTIONS | March 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18020168 | System and Method for Image-Based Remote Sensing of Crop Plants | February 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18065987 | COLLABORATIVE SYSTEM | December 2022 | July 2025 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17980479 | MANAGING MULTIPLE DATASETS FOR DATA BOUND OBJECTS | November 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17973295 | DEFORMING REAL-WORLD OBJECT USING IMAGE WARPING | October 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17949403 | Method and Device for Generating an Animation Graph | September 2022 | April 2025 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17726067 | PROCEDURES FOR PROVIDING AR/MR APPLICATIONS TO 5G DEVICES BY RUNNING AR/MR PROCESSING ON 5G EDGE SERVERS/CLOUD INCLUDING DYNAMIC SCENE UPDATES | April 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 45 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17535433 | DYNAMIC REFRESH RATES IN MULTI-DISPLAY SYSTEMS | November 2021 | June 2025 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17520089 | SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION-INFORMED DENOISING & RENDERING | November 2021 | December 2025 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17357417 | SORT MIDDLE ARCHITECTURE FOR MULTIPLE GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNITS | June 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17128708 | HIERARCHICAL TILING MECHANISM | December 2020 | November 2025 | Allow | 59 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17008292 | GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNIT RENDER MODE SELECTION SYSTEM | August 2020 | September 2025 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16808449 | OPTIMIZED DISPLAY OF TRANSFERRED SCREEN DATA BASED ON A USER OPERATION STATE | March 2020 | March 2021 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16793286 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD FOR INDICATING A POSITION OUTSIDE A DISPLAY REGION | February 2020 | December 2020 | Allow | 10 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16747780 | EVALUATION OF DIGITAL TWINS USING SOCIAL AUTOMATONS | January 2020 | March 2021 | Allow | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16392967 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD FOR INDICATING A POSITION OUTSIDE A DISPLAY REGION | April 2019 | November 2019 | Allow | 7 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16202899 | OPTIMIZED MEMORY ACCESS FOR RECONSTRUCTING A THREE DIMENSIONAL SHAPE OF AN OBJECT BY VISUAL HULL | November 2018 | June 2020 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15946954 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR DISPLAYING BIO-INFORMATION OR KINETIC INFORMATION | April 2018 | November 2018 | Allow | 8 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15906664 | METHOD OF, AND APPARATUS FOR, DATA PROCESSING | February 2018 | March 2020 | Allow | 25 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15849882 | Audio processing | December 2017 | September 2019 | Allow | 21 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15831187 | DIGITIZING VENUE MAPS | December 2017 | May 2019 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15805370 | APPARATUS AND METHOD OF REMOVING NOISE FROM SPARSE DEPTH MAP | November 2017 | November 2019 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15794243 | SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN ELECTRONIC DEVICES | October 2017 | November 2018 | Allow | 12 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15709929 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE COMPRISING REGISTER | September 2017 | August 2019 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15485567 | METHOD AND REPRESENTATION SYSTEM FOR THE MULTISENSORY REPRESENTATION OF AN OBJECT | April 2017 | October 2019 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15336693 | METHOD OF AND APPARATUS FOR GRAPHICS PROCESSING | October 2016 | October 2018 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15129750 | AUGMENTED REALITY GLASSES FOR MEDICAL APPLICATIONS AND CORRESPONDING AUGMENTED REALITY SYSTEM | September 2016 | September 2018 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14642850 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ANALYZING PARTS OF AN ELECTRONIC FILE | March 2015 | July 2017 | Allow | 28 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14423458 | MEMORY CONTROL DEVICE, MOBILE TERMINAL, AND COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM FOR CONTROLLING WRITING AND READING OF DATA TO FRAME MEMORY | February 2015 | August 2017 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14630060 | METHOD OF PROVIDING PREVIEW IMAGE REGARDING DISPLAY SETTING FOR DEVICE | February 2015 | June 2017 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14495712 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PHOTOGRAMMETRIC RENDERING | September 2014 | May 2016 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 14487756 | Diagnosing Graphics Display Problems | September 2014 | March 2016 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14314385 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR DISPLAYING BIO-INFORMATION OR KINETIC INFORMATION | June 2014 | October 2016 | Allow | 27 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 14280754 | APPARATUS, METHOD, AND DEVICE FOR ASSOCIATING INFORMATION WITH AN OBJECT | May 2014 | April 2016 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14358974 | MAP DISPLAY DEVICE AND MAP DISPLAY METHOD | May 2014 | September 2016 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14248977 | IMAGE DISPLAY METHOD FOR DIGITAL MANIPULATOR | April 2014 | October 2014 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14221104 | AUGMENTED REALITY CAMERA LUCIDA | March 2014 | January 2018 | Allow | 46 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 14201421 | Display Pipe Statistics Calculation for Video Encoder | March 2014 | August 2016 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14187884 | METHOD, MEDIUM AND SYSTEM RENDERING 3-D GRAPHICS DATA HAVING AN OBJECT TO WHICH A MOTION BLUR EFFECT IS TO BE APPLIED | February 2014 | November 2014 | Allow | 8 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14102855 | SERIALIZED ACCESS TO GRAPHICS RESOURCES | December 2013 | May 2017 | Allow | 41 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 13897538 | IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS HAVING REDUCED LINE BUFFER SIZE AND ASSOCIATED METHOD | May 2013 | February 2016 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13863313 | DISABLING AN AUTOMATIC ROTATION FUNCTION OF MOBILE COMPUTING DEVICES | April 2013 | May 2014 | Allow | 13 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13852656 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM HAVING A MARKER DETECTING UNIT AND AN EXTRACTING UNIT, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD BY USING THE SAME | March 2013 | February 2017 | Allow | 47 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 13839968 | CAMPAIGN OPTIMIZATION FOR EXPERIENCE CONTENT DATASET | March 2013 | November 2015 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13747875 | Predicted Weather display and decision support interface for flight deck | January 2013 | January 2017 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 13748232 | CONTEXTUAL MATTE BARS FOR ASPECT RATIO FORMATTING | January 2013 | August 2015 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13742054 | DISPLAY METHODS FOR HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE IMAGES AND USER INTERFACES FOR THE SAME | January 2013 | August 2014 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13649798 | HARDWARE ASSIST FOR PRIVILEGE ACCESS VIOLATION CHECKS | October 2012 | March 2016 | Allow | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13585022 | Method and Apparatus for Managing Video Memory in Embedded Device | August 2012 | June 2015 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13352197 | DISPLAY DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD THEREOF | January 2012 | June 2014 | Allow | 29 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13217060 | METHODS, APPARATUSES, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR COMPRESSION OF VISUAL SPACE FOR FACILITATING THE DISPLAY OF CONTENT | August 2011 | October 2013 | Allow | 26 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13216262 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING FREQUENCY SPECTRUM OF A SIGNAL IN AN IMAGE FILE | August 2011 | June 2014 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13122748 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ANALYZING PARTS OF AN ELECTRONIC FILE | May 2011 | December 2014 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12908308 | GRAPHICS RENDER CLOCK THROTTLING AND GATING MECHANISM FOR POWER SAVING | October 2010 | March 2014 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12886754 | DISPLAY DEVICE AND INPUT OPERATION SYSTEM HAVING THE SAME | September 2010 | November 2013 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12832078 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING AUGMENTED REALITY BASED ON MARKER TRACKING, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM THEREOF | July 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12801838 | Parallel operation processing apparatus and method | June 2010 | November 2013 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12757555 | LIST TEXTURE | April 2010 | February 2014 | Allow | 47 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12688629 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM | January 2010 | January 2014 | Allow | 48 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 12135638 | System and Method for Parallel Video Processing in Multicore Devices | June 2008 | December 2013 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 11785247 | METHOD, MEDIUM AND SYSTEM RENDERING 3-D GRAPHICS DATA HAVING AN OBJECT TO WHICH A MOTION BLUR EFFECT IS TO BE APPLIED | April 2007 | July 2013 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RICKS, DONNA J.
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.
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.
✓ 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 RICKS, DONNA J works in Art Unit 2618 and has examined 54 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 98.1%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 30 months.
Examiner RICKS, DONNA J's allowance rate of 98.1% places them in the 90% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by RICKS, DONNA J receive 2.07 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 55% 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 RICKS, DONNA J is 30 months. This places the examiner in the 60% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -3.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RICKS, DONNA J. This interview benefit is in the 6% 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, 31.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 66% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 37.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 56% 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.
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.
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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 91% 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 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 24% 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.