USPTO Examiner ABDIN SHAHEDA A - Art Unit 2621

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19051168DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICEFebruary 2025January 2026Allow1110NoNo
18965069DISPLAY DEVICEDecember 2024October 2025Allow1000YesNo
18939066DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICENovember 2024September 2025Allow1100YesNo
18918371MULTI-USER MULTI-TOUCH PROJECTED CAPACITANCE TOUCH SENSOR WITH EVENT INITIATION BASED ON COMMON TOUCH ENTITY DETECTIONOctober 2024September 2025Allow1100YesNo
18915290DISPLAY APPARATUSOctober 2024October 2025Allow1200YesNo
18672250DISPLAY PANEL AND ELECTRONIC DEVICEMay 2024July 2025Allow1410YesNo
18613749PIXEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAMEMarch 2024August 2025Allow1720YesNo
18683065HEAD-MOUNTED DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR ADJUSTING DISPLAY BRIGHTNESS THEREOFFebruary 2024August 2025Allow1820NoNo
18421945ELECTRONIC SYSTEM CONTROL METHOD WHICH CAN AUTOMATICALLY SET PERIPHERAL OPERATION MODEJanuary 2024September 2025Allow2010NoNo
18401975DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUSJanuary 2024June 2025Allow1820YesNo
18569234ARRAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY PANELDecember 2023July 2025Allow1910NoNo
18523275EYE MOVEMENT DETECTING DEVICE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND SYSTEMNovember 2023October 2025Allow2330YesNo
18506134DISPLAY DEVICENovember 2023June 2025Allow1940NoNo
18380116SHARED-CONTENT SESSION USER INTERFACESOctober 2023October 2025Allow2420YesYes
18370868DISPLAY DEVICESeptember 2023July 2025Allow2130YesNo
18221182INTUITIVE AUGMENTED REALITY COLLABORATION ON VISUAL DATAJuly 2023October 2025Allow2730YesYes
17921607DISPLAY PANEL, DISPLAY DEVICE, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR DISPLAY PANELOctober 2022September 2025Allow3510YesNo
17800576DISPLAY ASSEMBLY AND DISPLAY APPARATUSAugust 2022August 2025Allow3510NoNo
17363175VIRTUAL AMBIENT ILLUMINANCE SENSOR SYSTEMJune 2021June 2025Allow4840NoYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ABDIN, SHAHEDA A.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
4.5%
Lower 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, 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.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner ABDIN, SHAHEDA A - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ABDIN, SHAHEDA A works in Art Unit 2621 and has examined 1 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 48 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner ABDIN, SHAHEDA A'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 ABDIN, SHAHEDA A receive 4.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 97% 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ABDIN, SHAHEDA A is 48 months. This places the examiner in the 8% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 91% 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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 19% 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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.