Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18742695 | Method for Multiplexing Uplink Control Information and Apparatus | June 2024 | February 2025 | Allow | 8 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18462963 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DNN-BASED DATA INTERCEPTS | September 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18273766 | REQUEST INFORMATION SENDING METHOD AND DEVICE, AND REQUEST INFORMATION RECEIVING METHOD AND DEVICE | July 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18312569 | SIGNALING AND PROCEDURES FOR SUPPORTING POSITIONING REFERENCE UNITS | May 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18305773 | LOCATION BASED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE IN OIL & GAS INDUSTRY | April 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18248676 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PAGING, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | April 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 29 | 0 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18112349 | ROBOTIC H MATRIX CREATION | February 2023 | October 2024 | Abandon | 20 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18170955 | CLOUD-BASED SIM | February 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18061303 | LOCATION TRACKING METHOD, SERVER AND PROGRAM USING THE SAME | December 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18060914 | DEVICE POSITIONING | December 2022 | July 2025 | Allow | 31 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18072211 | DEMODULATING QZSS SIGNALS | November 2022 | December 2025 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18048524 | TRANSMITTING DIGITAL TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS ACROSS MODES TO LIMITED-ELIGIBILITY PROVIDER DEVICES TO IMPROVE NETWORK COVERAGE AND SYSTEM EFFICIENCY | October 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 36 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17952403 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR LOCALIZING A SIGNAL SOURCE | September 2022 | February 2026 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17663945 | Interpolation Method for Crowd-Sourced Electromagnetic Propagation Estimation of Indirect Paths | May 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17573325 | NETWORK RTK SERVICE METHOD, NETWORK RTK SERVER, COMMUNICATION BASE STATION, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | January 2022 | November 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17646105 | V2X MESSAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD | December 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17442865 | SYSTEM FOR DISPLAYING PRICES BY MEANS OF A DISPLAY PANEL | September 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17470887 | CONVEYING PRECISE CIVIC ADDRESS WITH AN EMERGENCY CALL | September 2021 | July 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17349160 | PRACH DETECTION METHOD AND APPARATUS | June 2021 | October 2023 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17275723 | Mathematical Summaries of Telecommunications Data for Data Analytics | March 2021 | May 2024 | Abandon | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17052666 | METHOD AND SERVER FOR PROVIDING ON-SCREEN AUTOMATIC RESPONSE SERVICE USING AUTOMATIC POP-UP THROUGH VOICE CALL AUTO-REPLY | November 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16844196 | LOCAL DETERMINATION OF GEO-LOCATION DATA BY USER DEVICES | April 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 42 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner WANG-HURST, KATHY W.
With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.
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.
⚠ Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner WANG-HURST, KATHY W works in Art Unit 2644 and has examined 7 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 28.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 38 months.
Examiner WANG-HURST, KATHY W's allowance rate of 28.6% places them in the 4% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by WANG-HURST, KATHY W 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 WANG-HURST, KATHY W is 38 months. This places the examiner in the 30% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +8.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by WANG-HURST, KATHY W. This interview benefit is in the 39% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 38% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 17% 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, 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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 20% 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 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.