Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18939631 | DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM AND DATA PROCESSING METHOD | November 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18888007 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | September 2024 | October 2025 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18530636 | IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS FOR SWITCHING BETWEEN DIFFRENT MODES OF DISPLAYING PAPER FEED TREAY INFORMATION | December 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 25 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 18524041 | APPARATUS AND METHOD OF RECORDING A STORAGE LOCATION BY SIZE FOR HARVESTED TUBERS | November 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18525159 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR VISUALIZING ANALYSIS RESULT OF ENDOSCOPIC IMAGE | November 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 26 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18288879 | Image processing device for preparing lesion candidate images for a machine learning model | October 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18496328 | Change Detection in Images Using Quantum Computers | October 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18225222 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DETECTING DEFECT OF ELECTRODE ASSEMBLY, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM | July 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18216779 | COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR ADJUSTING THE NOISE OF AN X-RAY IMAGE, X-RAY FACILITY, COMPUTER PROGRAM AND ELECTRONICALLY-READABLE DATA MEDIUM | June 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18211359 | BLOOD FLOW EXTRACTION IMAGE FORMING DEVICE, METHOD OF FORMING BLOOD FLOW EXTRACTION IMAGE, AND BLOOD FLOW EXTRACTION IMAGE FORMING PROGRAM | June 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18298736 | High resolution imaging behind scattering medium | April 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 29 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18107649 | BACKEND LEARNABLE DECODER TO FACILITATE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE OPERATION | February 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18074436 | ENDOSCOPE IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE | December 2022 | June 2025 | Allow | 42 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17968471 | OPTIMIZING CHECKPOINT LOCATIONS ALONG AN INSERTION TRAJECTORY OF A MEDICAL INSTRUMENT USING DATA ANALYSIS | October 2022 | December 2025 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17944207 | Pattern-based depth mapping with extended reference image | September 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 40 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17859561 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATED DRILL CUTTING MONITORING | July 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17828920 | MANUFACTURING PROCESS MONITORING AND INSPECTION BASED ON COREGISTRATION OF DIVERSE SENSOR DATA | May 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17780867 | IMAGE CAPTURING APPARATUS FOR ACQUIRING IMAGES AT DIFFERENT FRAME RATES AND PROCESSING THE IMAGES AT A SINGLE FRAME RATE | May 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17746775 | SPATIAL POSITIONING METHOD, RELATED APPARATUS, AND NAVIGATION STICK | May 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17684304 | INSPECTION SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING MATCHES BETWEEN SETS OF IMAGES OF ROTARY PARTS | March 2022 | March 2026 | Allow | 49 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17578314 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING PHASE INFORMATION | January 2022 | February 2026 | Allow | 49 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17452315 | Thermal Imaging for Self-Driving Cars | October 2021 | November 2025 | Allow | 49 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17481412 | Method And Apparatus For Reconstructing Images Via Apparatus Recording Parameters | September 2021 | October 2025 | Allow | 49 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17420498 | Noninvasive Determination of Resting State Diastole Hemodynamic Information | July 2021 | February 2026 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16944404 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE FOR DETERMINING WHETHER UPDATING THE FIRMWARE OF AN MFP IS NECESSARY | July 2020 | November 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 15547618 | IMAGE READING APPARATUS AND IMAGE READING METHOD | July 2017 | March 2019 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 15371639 | IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE, IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS, IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM | December 2016 | December 2018 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13149104 | APPARATUS THAT TRANSMITS JOB DATA TO TERMINAL, TERMINAL DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | May 2011 | May 2014 | Allow | 35 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 13054469 | Print preview display of confirmation page with main page based on selected display method | January 2011 | November 2013 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12539481 | A DISTRIBUTED PRINTING SYSTEM, PRINT CONTROL METHOD FOR DETERMINING PRINTING OUTPUT LOCATIONS ACCORDING TO CONTENT AND ESTIMATED TIME INFORMATION, AND PROGRAM | August 2009 | July 2013 | Allow | 47 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 12249755 | IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM FOR PRODUCING COPY PROTECTED IMAGES USING TRANSPARENT RECORDING MATERIAL | October 2008 | July 2012 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11853441 | DESIGN SUPPORT METHOD FOR SIMULATING A PRINTING OPERATION | September 2007 | July 2013 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 11752749 | FACSIMILE APPARATUS FOR RECEIVING IMAGE DATA FROM AN EXTERNAL APPARATUS AND SENDING IMAGE DATA TO THE EXTERNAL APPARATUS IN THE SAME CONNECTION SESSION | May 2007 | September 2012 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10339858 | PRINTER, PRINT CONTROL PROGRAM, MEDIUM HAVING PRINT CONTROL PROGRAM RECORDED THEREIN, AND PRINTING METHOD | January 2003 | April 2008 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 10321725 | INTERACTIVE PHOTO KIOSK | December 2002 | December 2006 | Allow | 48 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 10235848 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TESTING SCAN AND FAX JOBS | September 2002 | December 2007 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DULANEY, BENJAMIN O.
With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.
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.
✓ 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 DULANEY, BENJAMIN O works in Art Unit 2683 and has examined 15 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 49 months.
Examiner DULANEY, BENJAMIN O'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 DULANEY, BENJAMIN O receive 2.33 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 66% 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 DULANEY, BENJAMIN O is 49 months. This places the examiner in the 7% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DULANEY, BENJAMIN O. This interview benefit is in the 15% 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, 36.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 83% 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 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 18% 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 23% 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.