Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18591853 | Remote data access and speech wakeup using bone conduction signal fusion | February 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18585204 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MODEL USING SPEECH RECOGNITION RESULTS AS TEXT INPUT WITH DELAY TIMES | February 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18399876 | SPEAKING PRACTICE SYSTEM WITH RELIABLE PRONUNCIATION EVALUATION | December 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18390934 | AUTOMATED SEGMENTATION AND TRANSCRIPTION OF UNLABELED AUDIO SPEECH CORPUS | December 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 21 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18544354 | EMOTIVE TEXT-TO-SPEECH WITH AUTO DETECTION OF EMOTIONS | December 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18535521 | NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INTENT CLASSIFICATION OF SPEECH TRANSCRIPTION | December 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18532900 | System and Method for Securely Transmitting Voice Signals | December 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18525566 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR USING CONTEXTUAL INTERIM RESPONSES IN CONVERSATIONS MANAGED BY A VIRTUAL ASSISTANT SERVER | November 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18488578 | Knowledge Distillation with Domain Mismatch For Speech Recognition | October 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18551394 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONVERTING PLANT PROCEDURES TO VOICE INTERFACING SMART PROCEDURES | September 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18466568 | Systems and Methods for Implementing Smart Assistant Systems | September 2023 | February 2026 | Abandon | 29 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 18448628 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATIC SPEECH RECOGNITION (ASR) USING MULTI-TASK LEARNED (MTL) EMBEDDINGS | August 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18366242 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AD HOC ANALYSIS OF TEXT OF DATA RECORDS | August 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18228614 | PROMPT-TO-PROMPT IMAGE EDITING WITH CROSS-ATTENTION CONTROL | July 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 22 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18359113 | CONCEPT-CONDITIONED AND PRETRAINED LANGUAGE MODELS BASED ON TIME SERIES TO FREE-FORM TEXT DESCRIPTION GENERATION | July 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16040818 | TEXT ANALYSIS IN UNSUPPORTED LANGUAGES USING BACKTRANSLATION | July 2018 | June 2020 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14950232 | SPACE CONSTRAINED TEXT TRANSLATOR | November 2015 | May 2016 | Allow | 6 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13972959 | SYSTEM AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR VOICE GUIDANCE WITH SPEED CHANGE THEREOF BASED ON TREND | August 2013 | February 2016 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13239363 | METHOD, SYSTEM, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR GRAPHICALLY DISPLAYING RELATED TEXT IN AN ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT | September 2011 | November 2014 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13239360 | METHOD, SYSTEM, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR CREATING CLUSTERS OF TEXT IN AN ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT | September 2011 | October 2014 | Allow | 37 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13221953 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ACHIEVING EMOTIONAL TEXT TO SPEECH UTILIZING EMOTION TAGS ASSIGNED TO TEXT DATA | August 2011 | April 2015 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13094999 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONFIDENCE-WEIGHTED LEARNING OF FACTORED DISCRIMINATIVE LANGUAGE MODELS | April 2011 | April 2014 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13014185 | SPEECH RECOGNITION AND SYNTHESIS UTILIZING CONTEXT DEPENDENT ACOUSTIC MODELS CONTAINING DECISION TREES | January 2011 | February 2015 | Allow | 48 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 12800572 | MULTI-LANGUAGE TRANSLATOR FOR SPECIFIC FIELDS OF KNOWLEDGE | May 2010 | August 2012 | Allow | 27 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12488941 | INDEXING MECHANISM (Nth PHRASAL INDEX) FOR ADVANCED LEVERAGING FOR TRANSLATION | June 2009 | August 2015 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11214254 | SYSTEM AND METHOD OF EPSILON REMOVAL OF WEIGHTED AUTOMATA AND TRANSDUCERS | August 2005 | January 2008 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10799504 | RECOVERING AN ERASED VOICE FRAME WITH TIME WARPING | March 2004 | December 2005 | Allow | 21 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 10348943 | System and method for utilizing an anchor to reduce memory requirements for speech recognition | January 2003 | September 2005 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 10242467 | Correlation domain formant enhancement | September 2002 | October 2004 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09971816 | Technique for active voice recognition grammar adaptation for dynamic multimedia application | October 2001 | October 2005 | Abandon | 48 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09934475 | Toy having speech recognition function and two-way conversation for child | August 2001 | June 2005 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09933881 | DIGITAL INTERFACE DEVICE | August 2001 | March 2005 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 09929944 | Mel-frequency linear prediction speech recognition apparatus and method | August 2001 | July 2005 | Abandon | 47 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09830331 | PERIODICITY ENHANCEMENT IN DECODING WIDEBAND SIGNALS | July 2001 | June 2004 | Allow | 38 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 09892874 | DECODING METHOD AND DEVICE AND SYSTEMS IMPLEMENTING THEM | June 2001 | August 2004 | Allow | 37 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 09886778 | Vocoder for a mobile terminal using discontinuous transmission | June 2001 | September 2004 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09830276 | PERCEPTUAL WEIGHTING DEVICE AND METHOD FOR EFFICIENT CODING OF WIDEBAND SIGNALS | June 2001 | April 2004 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09878383 | Pitch changer for audio sound reproduced by frequency axis processing, method thereof and digital signal processor provided with the same | June 2001 | July 2004 | Abandon | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09873275 | ELECTRONIC MAIL DEVICE AND SYSTEM | June 2001 | February 2005 | Allow | 45 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 09870202 | MULTI-CONTEXT CONVERSATIONAL ENVIRONMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD | May 2001 | May 2005 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 09870043 | Speech synthesis | May 2001 | August 2005 | Abandon | 51 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09860144 | Voice activity detection apparatus, and voice activity/non-activity detection method | May 2001 | September 2005 | Abandon | 52 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09807628 | Speech processing | April 2001 | October 2005 | Abandon | 54 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09834504 | SPEECH COMMAND RECOGNITION APPARATUS, METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM USED THEREWITH FOR CONTROLLING A PLURALITY OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES OVER A NETWORK | April 2001 | September 2005 | Allow | 53 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 09822503 | Compressed domain universal transcoder | April 2001 | March 2006 | Abandon | 60 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09820585 | Method and system for translation management of human language text | March 2001 | September 2005 | Abandon | 54 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 09820401 | SPEECH RECOGNITION BASED CAPTIONING SYSTEM | March 2001 | September 2005 | Allow | 54 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 09821606 | Voice recognition system using implicit speaker adaptation | March 2001 | December 2004 | Abandon | 45 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09819783 | METHOD OF PROVIDING CONCISE FORMS OF NATURAL COMMANDS | March 2001 | June 2004 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 09818208 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONVERTING TEXT-TO-VOICE | March 2001 | August 2004 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 09812524 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REMOVING NOISE FROM FEATURE VECTORS | March 2001 | June 2005 | Allow | 51 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 09811729 | Video signal analysis and storage | March 2001 | January 2005 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09798892 | EDUCATION SYSTEM WITH SPEECH RECOGNITION USING INTERNET | March 2001 | June 2005 | Abandon | 51 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 09798794 | Methods and system for encoding and decoding a media sequence | March 2001 | February 2006 | Abandon | 59 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09778675 | ELECTROLARYNGEAL SPEECH ENHANCEMENT FOR TELEPHONY | February 2001 | June 2005 | Allow | 52 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 09773186 | Method, program, and tool for updating the national language versions of documents | January 2001 | October 2005 | Abandon | 56 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner WOZNIAK, JAMES S.
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 WOZNIAK, JAMES S works in Art Unit 2655 and has examined 41 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 58.5%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 45 months.
Examiner WOZNIAK, JAMES S's allowance rate of 58.5% places them in the 19% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by WOZNIAK, JAMES S receive 1.61 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 31% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by WOZNIAK, JAMES S is 45 months. This places the examiner in the 12% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +54.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by WOZNIAK, JAMES S. This interview benefit is in the 95% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 40.9% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 92% 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 70.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 92% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 33.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 21% 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 14.6% of allowed cases (in the 96% 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 8.3% of allowed cases (in the 87% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.
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.