Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19183001 | DISPLAY APPARATUS | April 2025 | February 2026 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18965244 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ESTIMATING TOUCH LOCATIONS AND TOUCH PRESSURES | December 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18950159 | DISPLAY DEVICE AND DISPLAY SYSTEM | November 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 15 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18903366 | DISPLAY CONTROL SYSTEM, METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM | October 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18830252 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING DEVICE BASED ON TAPPING AND STORAGE MEDIUM | September 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18817947 | ENVIRONMENT DISPLAY DEVICE | August 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 18 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18793953 | DISPLAY DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD THEREOF | August 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 19 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18746306 | WIDGET INTERACTION FOR EXTENDED REALITY (XR) APPLICATIONS | June 2024 | December 2025 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18645565 | SENSOR MODULE | April 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18614532 | DISPLAY APPARATUS | March 2024 | December 2025 | Allow | 21 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18510613 | APPARATUS AND SYSTEM USING ACTIVE-MATRIX ELECTROWETTING-ON-DIELECTRIC (AM-EWOD) | November 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18288036 | FUNCTIONAL SAFETY DISPLAY CONTROLLER AND FUNCTIONAL SAFETY DISPLAY CONTROL SYSTEM | October 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18478582 | SMART ACCESS STREAMING | September 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18260001 | DISPLAY DEVICE | June 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18266594 | ZOOM OPTICAL SYSTEM, OPTICAL APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE ZOOM OPTICAL SYSTEM | June 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18251237 | DISPLAY DEVICE AND DISPLAY APPARATUS | April 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18300857 | METHOD AND ARRANGEMENTS FOR PROVISION OF PIXEL VALUES FOR READOUT FROM AN IMAGE SENSOR | April 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17779655 | SPLICING DISPLAY UNIT, SPLICING DISPLAY DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF | May 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15470690 | GROUND DETECTION FOR TOUCH SENSITIVE DEVICE | March 2017 | March 2019 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15108561 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR TONE-MAPPING A HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE IMAGE | June 2016 | April 2018 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15193616 | USER INTERFACE FOR SYSTEM TO PROMOTE OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE OF HANDHELD COSMETIC DEVICE | June 2016 | February 2019 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15135528 | GESTURE CONTROL DEVICE WITH FINGERTIP IDENTIFICATION | April 2016 | September 2018 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 14723088 | DETERMINING TOUCH SIGNALS FROM INTERACTIONS WITH A REFERENCE PLANE PROXIMATE TO A DISPLAY SURFACE | May 2015 | October 2018 | Allow | 40 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14424664 | INTERFACE CIRCUIT AND DISPLAY DEVICE | February 2015 | April 2017 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14531951 | DIGITAL LOUPE DEVICE | November 2014 | July 2017 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14394567 | IN-CAR OPERATION DISPLAY DEVICE | October 2014 | February 2017 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14483236 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD THEREOF | September 2014 | December 2016 | Allow | 36 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 14324738 | ORGANIC LIGHT EMITTING DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME | July 2014 | November 2016 | Allow | 29 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14257888 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING DISPLAY POWER CONSUMPTION | April 2014 | May 2015 | Allow | 13 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14144515 | User Centric Interface for Interaction with Visual Display that Recognizes User Intentions | December 2013 | September 2014 | Allow | 9 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14009962 | DISPLAY DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR DRIVING DISPLAY DEVICE | October 2013 | June 2016 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 13968378 | TOUCH SCREEN AND METHOD OF PRODUCING THE SAME | August 2013 | July 2015 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13748915 | APPARATUS, SYSTEM, METHOD, AND PROGRAM FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION | January 2013 | January 2014 | Allow | 12 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13456031 | USER INTERFACE SYSTEM | April 2012 | February 2015 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13386321 | DEVICE FOR INPUTTING ENGLISH CHARACTERS FOR A MOBILE COMMUNICATION TERMINAL, AND METHOD FOR SAME | April 2012 | June 2013 | Allow | 17 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13432339 | SIGNAL LINE DRIVER CIRCUIT AND LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD THEREFOR | March 2012 | August 2013 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13386257 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR LOCATING AT LEAST ONE TOUCH ON A TOUCH-SENSITIVE SURFACE OF AN OBJECT | January 2012 | September 2014 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13386249 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR INPUTTING WRITING INFORMATION ACCORDING TO WRITING PATTERN | January 2012 | July 2014 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13386089 | Image Display Device And Image Display Method | January 2012 | March 2015 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13320628 | CHARACTER INPUT DEVICE AND CHARACTER INPUT METHOD | November 2011 | June 2014 | Allow | 31 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 13080693 | Semiconductor Device and Driving Method Thereof | April 2011 | May 2014 | Allow | 37 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13011737 | TOUCH PANEL, DISPLAY DEVICE WITH THE SAME, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE DISPLAY DEVICE | January 2011 | July 2013 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12895123 | Method and Device for Adjusting Brightness of an Optical Touch Panel | September 2010 | March 2014 | Allow | 42 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12833015 | PROTECTION-PLATE-ATTACHED ELECTRONIC MEMBER | July 2010 | December 2012 | Allow | 29 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12833225 | DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING CAPACITIVE TOUCH SCREEN | July 2010 | February 2013 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12833761 | KICKBACK COMPENSATION TECHNIQUES | July 2010 | October 2012 | Allow | 27 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12721152 | LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY DEVICE | March 2010 | June 2013 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12674071 | DRIVING DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD OF PLASMA DISPLAY PANEL, AND PLASMA DISPLAY APPARATUS | February 2010 | March 2013 | Allow | 37 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 12708408 | POWER CONTROL SYSTEM FOR DISPLAY MODULE INCLUDING EXTERNAL DC-DC CONVERTER | February 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12707891 | MOBILE TERMINAL APPARATUS AND METHOD OF STARTING APPLICATION | February 2010 | June 2013 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12708099 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM | February 2010 | November 2013 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12708057 | Method for Driving Semiconductor Device | February 2010 | August 2014 | Allow | 54 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 12587449 | APPARATUS, SYSTEM, METHOD, AND PROGRAM FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION | October 2009 | October 2012 | Allow | 36 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12507683 | ELECTRO-OSMOTIC TACTILE DISPLAY | July 2009 | December 2012 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12169961 | DISPLAY APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF | July 2008 | May 2014 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12216242 | LASER SCROLLING COLOR SCHEME FOR PROJECTION DISPLAY | July 2008 | October 2012 | Allow | 51 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12024537 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM THEREFOR | February 2008 | November 2012 | Allow | 58 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 11993514 | METHOD OF CONTROLLING A SYSTEM | December 2007 | June 2016 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11710529 | PICTURE DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME | February 2007 | May 2016 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 11705600 | SCREEN TRANSMISSION DEVICE, SCREEN DISPLAY METHOD AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM | February 2007 | July 2012 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner SHAH, PRIYANK J.
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, 40.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.
✓ 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 SHAH, PRIYANK J works in Art Unit 2626 and has examined 42 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 33 months.
Examiner SHAH, PRIYANK J's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 96% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by SHAH, PRIYANK J receive 2.12 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 57% 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 SHAH, PRIYANK J is 33 months. This places the examiner in the 47% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SHAH, PRIYANK J. 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 35.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 80% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 38.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 58% 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, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 10% 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 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 49% 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.
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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 2.4% of allowed cases (in the 77% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.
Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 25% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions less often than average. Allowances may 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.