USPTO Examiner MEROUAN ABDERRAHIM - Art Unit 2683

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19216393SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INTELLIGENTLY CONFIGURING AND DEPLOYING A MODEL ORCHESTRATOR MESH OF A MACHINE LEARNING-BASED DIALOGUE SYSTEM USING A GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACEMay 2025November 2025Allow500NoNo
18658257SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUSLY GENERATING DIGITAL PROCEDURES AND PROCEDURE GUIDANCE WITHIN A FACILITYMay 2024December 2025Allow2000NoNo
18589497IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUSFebruary 2024December 2025Allow2210YesNo
18588932Systems and Methods for Modeling Structures Using Point Clouds Derived from Stereoscopic Image PairsFebruary 2024June 2025Abandon1610NoNo
18443936METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECONSTRUCTING A THREE-DIMENSIONAL SHAPE BASED ON MULTIPLE LIGHT SOURCESFebruary 2024February 2026Allow2410NoNo
18423254NEURAL ADAPTER FOR CLASSICAL MACHINE LEARNING (ML) MODELSJanuary 2024October 2025Allow2010NoNo
18544382IMAGE PROCESSING PLATFORM HAVING AUTOMATICALLY AUTOSTEREOSCOPIC 3D IMAGE GENERATING FUNCTION AND METHOD THEREOFDecember 2023November 2025Allow2310NoNo
18541700METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR COLLABORATIVELY SCANNING AN ENVIRONMENTDecember 2023November 2025Allow2310NoNo
18512401METHOD FOR AUGMENTING PROCEDURES OF A LOCKED, REGULATED DOCUMENTNovember 2023October 2025Allow2310NoNo
18511437MESH TEXTURE METHOD FOR GENERATING TRUE ORTHOPHOTO USING GEOMETRIC INFORMATION AND THE SYSTEM THEREOFNovember 2023November 2025Allow2410NoNo
18503784METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR GENERATING 3D HDR RADIANCE FIELDSNovember 2023October 2025Allow2310NoNo
18379103PERFORMANCE RECORDING METHOD AND APPARATUS IN VIRTUAL SCENARIO, DEVICE, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND PROGRAM PRODUCTOctober 2023September 2025Allow2310NoNo
18470613INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUSSeptember 2023December 2025Allow2710NoNo
18038500OBJECT VISUALIZATIONMay 2023March 2026Allow3420NoNo
18307386METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PRESENTING OBJECT ANNOTATION INFORMATION, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMApril 2023September 2025Allow2920NoNo
18303858DISTRIBUTED LIGHT TRANSPORT SIMULATION WITH EFFICIENT RAY FORWARDINGApril 2023December 2025Allow3110NoNo
18077672APPARATUS FOR CREATING SHARED VIRTUAL CONVERSATIONAL SPACE WITH AR AND NON-AR DEVICES USING EDGE PROCESSINGDecember 2022February 2026Allow3840YesNo
18077141MAPPING & SEGMENTATION OF ORAL MAXILLOFACIAL COMPLEX & EXTRACTING CLINICAL DATADecember 2022November 2025Allow3520NoNo
17981770NEURAL RENDERING FOR INVERSE GRAPHICS GENERATIONNovember 2022September 2025Allow3420YesYes
17949529SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO ACCOUNT FOR LATENCY ASSOCIATED WITH REMOTE DRIVING APPLICATIONSSeptember 2022October 2025Allow3620NoNo
17814924CONTROLLING VEHICLE DISPLAY FOR ENHANCEMENTJuly 2022January 2026Abandon4240YesYes
17808507Systems and Methods for Performing Video Communication Using Text-Based CompressionJune 2022October 2025Allow4020NoNo
17719934GENERATION AND SIMULTANEOUS DISPLAY OF MULTIPLE DIGITALLY GARMENTED AVATARSApril 2022October 2025Allow4230YesNo
17159977IMAGE SYNTHESIS USING ONE OR MORE NEURAL NETWORKSJanuary 2021April 2023Abandon2670YesYes
15664007METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING GRAPHICAL CONTENT THROUGH PHYSICAL SYSTEM MODELLINGJuly 2017May 2018Allow910NoNo
15662047AUGMENTED REALITY PRODUCT PREVIEWJuly 2017September 2018Allow1410YesNo
15635217Systems and Methods for Reducing Computer Resources Consumption to Reconstruct Shape of Multi-Object ImageJune 2017April 2018Allow910NoNo
15364979IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPERATING IN LOW-POWER MODENovember 2016June 2018Allow1910NoNo
15240902RUN-LENGTH COMPRESSION AND DECOMPRESSION OF MEDIA TILESAugust 2016December 2018Allow2801YesNo
15079540METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR VIRTUAL SENSOR DATA GENERATION WITH DEPTH GROUND TRUTH ANNOTATIONMarch 2016June 2018Allow2630NoNo
14827865METHOD OF RENDERING 3D IMAGE AND IMAGE OUTPUTTING DEVICE THEREOFAugust 2015March 2019Allow4340YesNo
14664139IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM, X-RAY DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS, AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHODMarch 2015September 2017Allow3010NoNo
14660769GENERATION OF DEPTH DATA BASED ON SPATIAL LIGHT PATTERNMarch 2015April 2017Allow2530NoNo
14581111GLARE CORRECTION VIA PIXEL PROCESSINGDecember 2014October 2017Allow3411NoNo
14495224METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR NEAR-LOSSLESS COMPRESSION AND DECOMPRESSION OF 3D MESHES AND POINT CLOUDSSeptember 2014April 2017Allow3020NoNo
14321409PREFIXED SUMMED LENGTH IN GRAPHICS PROCESSINGJuly 2014July 2017Allow3620YesYes
14313006MULTI VIEW IMAGE DISPLAY APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFJune 2014February 2015Allow810YesNo
14277093Apparatus and Method for Managing MarketingMay 2014April 2015Allow1110NoNo
13993268Interactive Screen ViewingJune 2013February 2016Allow3240YesYes
13993258COARSE-TO-FINE MULTPLE DISPARITY CANDIDATE STEREO MATCHINGJune 2013January 2016Allow3140YesNo
13633735PATTERN REPRESENTATION IMAGES FOR BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE DASHBOARD OBJECTSOctober 2012September 2015Allow3530NoNo
13592500SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING DISTRACTING FEATURES IN A VISUAL DISPLAYAugust 2012June 2016Allow4530YesNo
13502011SUPERIMPOSED ANNOTATION OUTPUTApril 2012March 2017Allow5950YesNo
13279816THREE-DIMENSIONAL IMAGE OUTPUT DEVICE, THREE-DIMENSIONAL IMAGE OUTPUT METHOD, THREE-DIMENSIONAL IMAGE DISPLAY DEVICE, AND COMPUTER READABLE RECORDING MEDIUMOctober 2011June 2015Allow4420NoNo
13122912Generation of Depth Data Based on Spatial Light PatternApril 2011January 2015Allow4530YesNo
12888926METHODS, APPARATUSES AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR GROUPING CONTENT IN AUGMENTED REALITYSeptember 2010March 2017Allow6040NoYes
12669495MULTI VIEW DISPLAYS AND METHODS FOR PRODUCING THE SAMEJanuary 2010January 2015Allow6040NoNo
12611549METHODS FOR IMPLEMENTING MULTI-TOUCH GESTURES ON A SINGLE-TOUCH TOUCH SURFACENovember 2009September 2014Allow5940NoNo
12289026HIERARCHICAL BASED 3D IMAGE PROCESSOR, METHOD, AND MEDIUMOctober 2008February 2015Allow6050YesNo
11949731Method And System For Tracking Accesses To Virtual Addresses In Graphics ContextsDecember 2007May 2015Allow6040YesYes
11754582INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAMMay 2007October 2014Allow6080YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
10.0%
Lower than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
5
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(40.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(60.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
66.1%
Higher than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

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, 40.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM works in Art Unit 2683 and has examined 28 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 96.4%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 34 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM's allowance rate of 96.4% places them in the 86% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM receive 2.93 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 85% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 44% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a -7.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MEROUAN, ABDERRAHIM. This interview benefit is in the 4% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 23.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 30% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 13.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 13% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

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 12% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 80.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 50.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 91% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

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.