USPTO Examiner RUSHING MARK S - Art Unit 2689

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18886223SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SIMULATING DRIVING WHILE BEING COGNITIVELY IMPAIREDSeptember 2024December 2025Allow1500NoNo
18843427AERONAUTIC GROUND LIGHT FIXTURE WITH RF ANTENNASeptember 2024December 2025Allow1600NoNo
18727750ABNORMALITY IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM USING LASER LIGHT, ABNORMALITY IDENTIFICATION METHOD USING LASER LIGHT, AND STORAGE MEDIUMJuly 2024February 2026Allow1910NoNo
18766400LOCATOR ATTACHMENT DEVICE FOR USE WITH EYEGLASSES AND EYEGLASSES WITH TEMPLES WITH LOCATOR ATTACHMENT DEVICEJuly 2024March 2026Abandon2010NoNo
18733423POWER CABLE VOLTAGE DROP MONITORINGJune 2024February 2026Allow2000YesNo
18712220CHANNEL MULTIPLIER REMOTE CONTROL SYSTEMMay 2024November 2025Allow1800YesNo
18658332CLOSE-RANGE COMMUNICATIONS WITH A VEHICLE'S ULTRASONIC PROXIMITY SENSORSMay 2024October 2025Allow1810NoNo
18703354Digital Currency Wallet Management Method, Apparatus, and System, Remote Control Method, Apparatus and System for Digital Currency WalletApril 2024January 2026Allow2100YesNo
18623527INSPECTION SUPPORT METHOD, INSPECTION SUPPORT APPARATUS, AND INSPECTION SUPPORT PROGRAMApril 2024January 2026Allow2210NoNo
18603795Electric Power Generating Footwear and Method of Charging Electronic DevicesMarch 2024January 2026Allow2310NoNo
18588901DOOR SYSTEM FOR OPENING AND CLOSING OPENING FOR ENTRANCE AND EXIT OF SENSOR FOR VEHICLESFebruary 2024September 2025Allow1900YesNo
18442211Manifold For Filtering Medical Waste Being Drawn Under Vacuum Into A Medical Waste Collection System And Related MethodsFebruary 2024August 2025Allow1810NoNo
18428518LOCK SYSTEM WITH INTEGRATED SENSORS FOR TRANSLATABLE STRUCTUREJanuary 2024November 2025Allow2210YesNo
18402942DYNAMIC POSTURE ASSISTING SYSTEM IN A VEHICLE SEATJanuary 2024September 2025Allow2010NoNo
18402015MULTI-ALERT POSTURE ASSISTING SYSTEM IN A VEHICLE SEATJanuary 2024January 2026Allow2420YesNo
18392688SYSTEMS, COMPONENTS, AND METHODS FOR OPERATING MOVABLE BARRIER OPERATORS IN A HEADLESS MODEDecember 2023August 2025Allow2010YesNo
18392446HYBRID ODOMETRYDecember 2023November 2025Allow2300YesNo
18513926DIGITAL TWIN PLATFORM PROVISION SYSTEM FOR DETECTING AND RESPONDING TO FIRE IN INSTALLATION REGION OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTNovember 2023December 2025Allow2500YesNo
18458244DISPLAYING CONCEALED HIGH-RISK LEVEL COMPONENTS INSIDE A VEHICLEAugust 2023January 2026Abandon2920YesNo
18238702Urine Temperature MonitorAugust 2023August 2025Abandon2410NoNo
18359038TIRE MONITORING SENSOR POWERED BY WIRELESS POWER, SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF, AND VEHICLE HAVING THE SAMEJuly 2023February 2026Allow3110YesNo
18342050CAR SEAT SAFETY DEVICEJune 2023August 2025Allow2510YesNo
18084098APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING REAL-TIME VEHICLE DATA CAPTURE AND VEHICLE IDENTIFICATIONDecember 2022April 2025Abandon2810NoNo
17974862ROBOTIC ARM OPERATING SYSTEMOctober 2022August 2025Allow3300YesNo
15975139WARNING DEVICE GENERATING WARNING VIBRATION WAVE FOR VEHICLE WITH TORQUE DETECTORMay 2018December 2018Allow710NoNo
15789071STANDBY POWER CONTROLLER WITH TIMER AND DIFFERENTIATED USAGE DETECTIONOctober 2017April 2019Allow1820NoNo
15786825FUEL FILL VOLUME ESTIMATION USING VIRTUAL ZONE AND FUEL TANK FLOATOctober 2017October 2018Allow1210NoNo
15561864DISPLAY DEVICE AND DISPLAY METHOD FOR MONITORED-PERSON MONITORING SYSTEM, AND MONITORED-PERSON MONITORING SYSTEMSeptember 2017March 2019Allow1720NoNo
15710647SPORT-BOOT PRESSURE MONITOR AND METHOD OF USESeptember 2017July 2018Allow1010NoNo
15544579COMMUNICATIONS APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR STANDBY POWER CONTROLLER WHICH INTERRUPTS POWER TO AN APPLIANCE IN A STANDBY STATEJuly 2017May 2019Allow2220NoNo
15610712REPELLING PESTS, ANIMATE OR INANIMATE, WITH PROJECTILESJune 2017August 2018Allow1410NoNo
15427240HAPTIC BROADCAST WITH SELECT HAPTIC METADATA BASED ON HAPTIC PLAYBACK CAPABILITYFebruary 2017May 2018Allow1510NoNo
15115642Emblem for a Motor Vehicle with a Sensor System For Monitoring a Detection Region and an Actuation Region and Method TheretoJuly 2016April 2019Allow3240YesNo
14658071ELECTRONIC REAL ESTATE ACCESS SYSTEMMarch 2015December 2017Allow3310NoNo
14588571Pedestrian Safe Crossing Vehicle Indication SystemJanuary 2015September 2016Abandon2120NoNo
14252682MONITOR WORN BY USER FOR PROVIDING HYGIENE HABITS INDICATIONApril 2014October 2018Allow5451YesYes
13709039SECURE KEYLESS ENTRY SYSTEMDecember 2012February 2014Allow1420NoNo
13615556SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING QUALITY OF SERVICE TO RFIDSeptember 2012June 2013Allow910NoNo
13429618SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MONITORING LOCATION OF A VEHICLEMarch 2012July 2012Allow400YesNo
13417206BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION AND VERIFICATIONMarch 2012September 2012Allow600YesNo
13397373CONTROLLING RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION TAG SIGNAL RANGEFebruary 2012November 2012Allow910YesNo
13265585TRACKING AND MONITORING SYSTEM FOR OPENCAST MINESFebruary 2012June 2014Allow3110YesNo
13347907RFID Tag, Interrogator and System with Improved Symbol Encoding and DecodingJanuary 2012January 2013Allow1310NoNo
13296245MULTIMODE REMOTE CONTROLLER COMPRISING AN ACCELEROMETER, A GYROSCOPE, A CAPACITIVE PRESSURE TRANSDUCER, AND A TOUCH PADNovember 2011March 2014Allow2820YesNo
13269255ELECTRONIC ACCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS AND METHODSOctober 2011August 2012Allow1010NoNo
13039395ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR DRIVING SAFETYMarch 2011September 2013Allow3010YesNo
12986255SECURITY IMPLEMENTED WITH A COMMUNICATION DEVICEJanuary 2011June 2013Allow2910NoNo
12986516PERSONAL LOCATOR DEVICE FOR A CHILD HAVING AN INTEGRATED MOBILE COMMUNICATION DEVICE THAT QUALIFIES TO BE CARRIED IN AN EDUCATIONAL SETTINGJanuary 2011May 2013Allow2810YesNo
12984398SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SLEEP MANAGEMENTJanuary 2011February 2014Allow3720YesNo
12864621RFID tag information processing apparatus, system, method, and computer-readable storage medium for judging a movement direction of an RFID tagJuly 2010March 2013Allow3110YesNo
12763918Hostless automobile reverse radar warning systemApril 2010December 2012Allow3210NoNo
12763472SYSTEM AND METHOD RESPONSIVE TO AN EVENT DETECTED AT A GLUCOSE MONITORING DEVICEApril 2010April 2014Allow4730NoNo
12762982Deceleration-Activated Brake LightsApril 2010December 2012Allow3210YesNo
12738007PORTABLE TERMINAL DEVICE AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAMEApril 2010November 2012Allow3110NoNo
12756790INTERLOCK SYSTEM AND METHODApril 2010September 2012Allow2910NoNo
12752804METHOD FOR SETTING REMOTE CONTROLLER AND REMOTE CONTROLLER APPLYING THE SAMEApril 2010February 2014Allow4740YesNo
12476180PROGRAMMING A UNIVERSAL REMOTE CONTROL VIA DIRECT INTERACTIONJune 2009September 2013Allow5230YesNo
12365617SECURE KEYLESS ENTRY SYSTEMFebruary 2009August 2012Allow4200YesNo
12286336TAG LOCATION GUIDING METHOD AND TAG LOCATION GUIDING SYSTEM FOR COMMUNICATION TERMINALSSeptember 2008June 2013Allow5640YesNo
11902717ARTICLE MANAGEMENT METHOD INCLUDING SHARED MEMORY AND READER/WRITERSSeptember 2007July 2012Allow5830NoNo
11771487ALARM APPARATUS AND MANUFACTURING METHODJune 2007December 2012Allow6030YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RUSHING, MARK S.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
6.0%
Lower 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, 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.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner RUSHING, MARK S - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RUSHING, MARK S works in Art Unit 2689 and has examined 37 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 97.3%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 29 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RUSHING, MARK S's allowance rate of 97.3% places them in the 88% 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 RUSHING, MARK S receive 1.68 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 34% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by RUSHING, MARK S is 29 months. This places the examiner in the 65% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +5.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RUSHING, MARK S. This interview benefit is in the 30% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 92% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 40.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 30% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 2.7% of allowed cases (in the 78% 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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 30% 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:

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.