Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18792585 | FLOOD ALARM SYSTEM AND FLOOD ALARM METHOD | August 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18720230 | Method for the Animated Representation of an Object Perception and of a Driving Intention of an Assistance System of a Vehicle, Assistance System, Computer Program, and Computer-Readable (Storage) Medium | June 2024 | December 2025 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18714637 | MONITORING SYSTEM, POSITIONING APPARATUS, POSITIONING METHOD, MONITORING APPARATUS, MONITORING METHOD, AND COMPUTER READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM | May 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18637689 | VEHICLE OPERATION DIAGNOSIS DEVICE | April 2024 | October 2025 | Allow | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18636261 | System for Seamless and Secure Networking of Health Devices | April 2024 | September 2024 | Allow | 5 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18434781 | METHODS FOR DETECTING GAS ALARMS BASED ON SMART GAS AND INTERNET OF THINGS (IOT) SYSTEMS | February 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18422630 | PROXIMITY SENSOR THREAT WARNING PERSONAL SECURITY SYSTEM AND METHOD | January 2024 | December 2025 | Abandon | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18414736 | PASSIVE PERSONAL LASER DETECTOR WARNING SAFETY DEVICE | January 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 26 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18413871 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PERSONAL AND PUBLIC SAFETY MONITORING | January 2024 | December 2025 | Abandon | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18414397 | METHOD FOR GAS GATE STATION MONITORING BASED ON SMART GAS PLATFORM AND INTERNET OF THINGS SYSTEM THEREOF | January 2024 | July 2024 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18521405 | USER PREFERENCES IN RESPONDER NETWORK RESPONDER SELECTION | November 2023 | September 2024 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18461252 | Security System | September 2023 | October 2024 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18459863 | AUTONOMOUS AIR TAXI SEPARATION SYSTEM AND METHOD | September 2023 | September 2024 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18362999 | METHOD FOR ABNORMAL JUDGMENT AND SAFETY INSPECTION OF SMART GAS HARMFUL COMPONENTS, INTERNET OF THINGS SYSTEM, AND MEDIUM THEREOF | August 2023 | August 2024 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18362904 | METHOD FOR EARLY WARNING SMART GAS HARMFUL COMPONENTS, INTERNET OF THINGS SYSTEM, AND MEDIUM THEREOF | July 2023 | August 2024 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18179741 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REAL-TIME PRIORITIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF HEAT TRACE CIRCUIT ALARMS | March 2023 | September 2024 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18084661 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR PERFORMING UWB MULTI-RANGING AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF | December 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18064619 | CONNECTED ROADSIDE TRAFFIC DETECTION AND CONTROL SYSTEM | December 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17974103 | NAVIGABLE 3D VIEW OF A PREMISES ALARM EVENT | October 2022 | September 2024 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17915551 | DISTRESS SIGNAL SYSTEM FOR SEA VESSELS AND A METHOD THEREFOR | September 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17915744 | PERSON ACTIVITY RECOGNITION | September 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17947409 | VIDEO RECORDING DEVICE | September 2022 | July 2024 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17878818 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND RELATED METHODS FOR FIRE DETECTION | August 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 26 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17842688 | INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND NONVOLATILE STORAGE MEDIUM CAPABLE OF BEING READ BY COMPUTER THAT STORES INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAM | June 2022 | September 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17274917 | INFORMATION PROCESSOR, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM | March 2021 | July 2024 | Allow | 40 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16191506 | INDOOR LOCATION BASED EMERGENCY CARE COMMUNICATION METHOD | November 2018 | January 2020 | Allow | 14 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16174588 | CONNECTOR ELEMENT INFORMATION DETECTIONS | October 2018 | February 2020 | Allow | 16 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15206130 | NETWORKING OF IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICES AND WEARABLE DEVICES | July 2016 | February 2020 | Allow | 43 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 13875322 | MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR CONTAINER DATA CENTER | May 2013 | February 2015 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13569896 | Electronically Augmented Smart Lock for Trash Containers | August 2012 | April 2014 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13420027 | PERSONAL AUTHENTICATION APPARATUS AND PERSONAL AUTHENTICATION METHOD | March 2012 | December 2012 | Allow | 9 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13059282 | DEVICE FOR SCANNING THE DIVISION MARK OF A MECHANICAL ROLLER-TYPE COUNTER, FOR ANY TYPE OF COUNTER | June 2011 | April 2014 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13110489 | NON-VISUAL PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION ON AN ELECTRONIC WIRELESS DEVICE | May 2011 | December 2013 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12953157 | FLUID LEVEL MONITORING SYSTEM AND METHOD | November 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 32 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12799793 | System and method for identifying object and releasing its security | April 2010 | November 2012 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12626469 | SAFETY SYSTEM FOR ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLES | November 2009 | December 2012 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12451618 | METHOD FOR MONITORING AND/OR CONTROLLING A TRANSPORT DEVICE, TRANSPORT DEVICE FOR CARRYING OUT SAID METHOD AND CLAMP FOR DETACHABLY HOLDING AND TRANSPORTING | November 2009 | October 2012 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12367999 | RESONANT-CIRCUIT STRUCTURE | February 2009 | June 2015 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BEE, ANDREW 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 BEE, ANDREW W. works in Art Unit 2677 and has examined 14 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 32 months.
Examiner BEE, ANDREW W.'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 BEE, ANDREW W. receive 1.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 26% 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 BEE, ANDREW W. is 32 months. This places the examiner in the 51% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BEE, ANDREW W.. 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, 42.9% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 94% 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 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 99% 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 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 4% 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 22% 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 29% 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.