Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18611082 | POSITION DETERMINATION IN A COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | March 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18592001 | MEASUREMENT DEVICE | February 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18583698 | DEVICES AND METHODS FOR POSITIONING EXTERNAL DEVICES IN RELATION TO IMPLANTED DEVICES | February 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18418463 | Fixed wireless node with frequency synthesizer | January 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18392372 | METHOD FOR DEMODULATING A RF SIGNAL | December 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18390442 | COMMUNICATION CONTROL SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION SYSTEM CONTROL METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM | December 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18504113 | TRANSMIT POWER CONTROL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION NETWORKS | November 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18557848 | TECHNIQUES FOR LATENCY REDUCTION FOR PATH LOSS REFERENCE SIGNAL ACTIVATION | October 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 26 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18482003 | POWER CONTROL PARAMETER DETERMINING METHOD AND APPARATUS | October 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18476548 | THIRD-PARTY WIRELESS DEVICE IDENTIFICATION | September 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18374640 | POWER CONTROL PARAMETER INDICATION METHOD, TERMINAL, AND NETWORK SIDE DEVICE | September 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18470901 | WIRELESS NETWORK ENERGY SAVING WITH GRAPH NEURAL NETWORKS | September 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 29 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18468109 | APPARATUS, METHOD AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PRECODING | September 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 28 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 18279782 | TECHNIQUES FOR MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE REPORTING | August 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18276206 | COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION TERMINAL, COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM | August 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18324675 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND CONTROLLING METHOD OF ELECTRONIC DEVICE | May 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18252412 | MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE REPORTING | May 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18248385 | COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND RADIO WAVE REFRACTING PLATE INSTALLATION METHOD | April 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18095361 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF POWER HARVESTING AND DISTRIBUTION | January 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18050051 | DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM, OBJECT DETECTION METHOD, AND APPARATUS THEREOF | October 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17973408 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR LEARNING EQUIVARIANT AND INVARIANT REPRESENTATION FOR ROTATION OF IMAGE BASED ON GRAPH CONVOLUTIONAL NETWORK | October 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14253254 | GROUP COMMUNICATION SESSIONS IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM | April 2014 | September 2014 | Allow | 5 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 14047524 | POWER LOADING IN MU-MIMO | October 2013 | August 2014 | Allow | 10 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13932281 | WIRELESS IMAGE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND METHOD | July 2013 | July 2014 | Allow | 13 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13541124 | USING LOW-COST TAGS AS A VIRTUAL STORAGE MEDIUM FOR MULTIMEDIA INFORMATION | July 2012 | February 2014 | Allow | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13502351 | METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING FEEDBACK INFORMATION IN CoMP, TERMINAL FOR PERFORMING SAME, METHOD FOR GENERATING CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION AND BASE STATION APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING SAME | April 2012 | July 2014 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13341830 | Wireless Bidirectional Communications between a Mobile Device and Associated Secure Element using Inaudible Sound Waves | December 2011 | June 2014 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13081851 | TRANSMITTING APPARATUS AND RECEIVING APPARATUS | April 2011 | March 2014 | Allow | 36 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 13076088 | COOPERATIVE SPECTRUM SENSING IN COGNITIVE RADIO NETWORKS | March 2011 | January 2014 | Allow | 34 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13119260 | METHOD AND APPARATUS OF CONTROLLING UPLINK POWER FOR MULTI-CELL COOPERATIVE SYSTEM | March 2011 | December 2013 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 12937000 | Speaker Device for a Vehicle | November 2010 | December 2012 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12955164 | METHOD AND APPARATUS OF CELL SEARCHING IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | November 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12832335 | GROUP COMMUNICATION SESSIONS IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM | July 2010 | December 2013 | Allow | 41 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 12199113 | INTERFERENCE DETECTION APPARATUS AND METHOD | August 2008 | February 2014 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12170835 | PUSH-TO-TALK COMMUNICATION METHOD AND SYSTEM | July 2008 | September 2012 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11943160 | CALL SERVER, CALL TERMINAL, CALL SYSTEM, TRANSFER PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM STORAGE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM THEREOF | November 2007 | June 2013 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 2 | No | No |
| 11360960 | System and method for creating an ad hoc group in a push-to-talk system | February 2006 | November 2013 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 10515480 | CONTROLLER FOR GSM AND 3G BASE TRANSCEIVER STATIONS IN A GSM CORE NETWORK WITH EXTERNAL HANDOVER POSSIBILITY FROM 3G CELLS TO GSM CELLS TRASPARENT TO GSM CORE NETWORK | November 2004 | November 2006 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 10864505 | SPEAKER SOUND ENHANCEMENT FOR A MOBILE TERMINAL | June 2004 | March 2008 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10675635 | Keypad assembly for portable radiotelephone and method of controlling the same | September 2003 | April 2014 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ALAM, FAYYAZ.
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, 50.0% 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 ALAM, FAYYAZ works in Art Unit 2646 and has examined 19 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 ALAM, FAYYAZ'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 ALAM, FAYYAZ receive 2.11 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 56% 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 ALAM, FAYYAZ 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 ALAM, FAYYAZ. 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, 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 enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 49% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.
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 11% 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 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, 133.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 96% 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 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 27% 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.