Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18700148 | SOLID-STATE IMAGE SENSOR, IMAGING APPARATUS, AND CONTROL METHOD FOR SOLID-STATE IMAGE SENSOR | April 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18601990 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE | March 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18585314 | IMAGE PICKUP APPARATUS CONTROLLING AN OPERATING MODE, ITS CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | February 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18582050 | ADAPTIVE SYNCHRONIZATION FOR AUTOMATIC EXPOSURE CONTROL (AEC) | February 2024 | July 2025 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18531487 | MOBILE SINGLE LEAF SCANNER | December 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18524862 | IMAGING APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD FOR THE SAME, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | November 2023 | May 2025 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18516179 | DRIVING APPARATUS FOR CAMERA AND CAMERA MODULE INCLUDING DRIVING APPARATUS FOR CAMERA | November 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17970916 | Image Syntheis Method, Electronic Device, and Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Storage Medium | October 2022 | August 2024 | Abandon | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17759499 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE | July 2022 | February 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17749637 | WIRING MEMBER, SHAKE CORRECTION UNIT, AND SMARTPHONE | May 2022 | September 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17429412 | IMAGE SENSOR AND IMAGING APPARATUS | August 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 10254529 | APPARATUS FOR AND METHOD OF SYNTHESIZING FACE IMAGE | September 2002 | September 2006 | Allow | 48 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 10255071 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ACQUIRING LINE SIGNALS | September 2002 | May 2007 | Allow | 56 | 2 | 1 | No | Yes |
| 10077445 | IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE | February 2002 | September 2006 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 09984728 | MIRROR BOX AND ELECTRONIC STILL CAMERA | October 2001 | August 2006 | Allow | 58 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner YE, LIN.
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.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner YE, LIN works in Art Unit 2638 and has examined 5 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 80.0%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 55 months.
Examiner YE, LIN's allowance rate of 80.0% places them in the 50% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by YE, LIN receive 2.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% 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 YE, LIN is 55 months. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +25.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by YE, LIN. This interview benefit is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.
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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 20.0% of allowed cases (in the 98% 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 26% 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.