USPTO Examiner RIYAMI ABDULLAH A - Art Unit 2831

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18583338DEVICE AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING SIGNAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMFebruary 2024February 2026Allow2400NoNo
18560468SHORT SIGNALING TRANSMISSION FOR SIDELINK COMMUNICATION IN UNLICENSED SPECTRUMNovember 2023January 2026Allow2610NoNo
18453448CARD EDGE CONNECTOR WITH REDUCED HEIGHTAugust 2023February 2026Allow3010NoNo
18355462Shield Contact Element and Method of Manufacturing Such a Shield Contact ElementJuly 2023February 2026Allow3110NoNo
18331226TERMINAL UNIT, AND CONNECTOR INCLUDING THE SAMEJune 2023January 2026Allow3210NoNo
18196585ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR WITH AN IMPROVED SHIELDING TUBEMay 2023January 2026Allow3210NoNo
18196328CONNECTION ELEMENT FOR ELECTRICALLY CONNECTING A FLUID-COOLABLE INDIVIDUAL LINE, FLUID-COOLABLE INDIVIDUAL LINE UNIT, AND CHARGING CABLEMay 2023July 2025Allow2610NoNo
18306823CONNECTOR MODULEApril 2023February 2026Allow3410NoNo
18133601RELIABLE, ROBUST CARD EDGE CONNECTORApril 2023November 2025Allow3110YesNo
18104074CONDUCTOR HAVING AN INNER CONDUCTOR ENGAGERJanuary 2023July 2025Allow3010NoNo
18002257TELECOMMUNICATIONS JACK ADAPTERDecember 2022July 2025Allow3110NoNo
18074599UNLOCKING ELEMENT AND ELECTRICAL PLUG-IN PROVIDED THEREWITHDecember 2022October 2025Allow3520NoNo
17939885ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC COMPONENTSeptember 2022March 2025Allow3000NoNo
17871611DIFFERENTIAL I/O CARD USING CMT CONNECTORJuly 2022March 2026Allow4310NoNo
17202961BALL GRID ARRAY CARD EDGE CONNECTORMarch 2021February 2025Allow4720YesNo
17251436A SYSTEM AND A METHOD FOR UNLOCKING ITEM/SDecember 2020April 2025Abandon5320NoNo
16791952INSULATED SOCKET BODY AND TERMINALS FOR A LAND GRID ARRAY SOCKET ASSEMBLYFebruary 2020March 2021Abandon1320YesNo
16578518CONNECTION TERMINAL FOR PCB BOARDSSeptember 2019July 2021Abandon2220NoNo
16540616LEVER TYPE CONNECTORAugust 2019August 2021Abandon2420NoNo
16377816MULTI-PIECE CASSETTEApril 2019March 2021Abandon2320NoNo
16019375Flexible Twisted Cable With End ConnectorsJune 2018December 2021Abandon4221NoYes
15618735HEATER CONTROL APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING HEATER FOR BATTERYJune 2017July 2019Abandon2500NoNo
15439523FUEL CELL DRIVING METHOD, FUEL CELL SYSTEM, AND VEHICLEFebruary 2017February 2019Abandon2300NoNo
15325423CONTROL METHOD FOR FUEL CELL SYSTEM, FUEL CELL SYSTEM, AND POWER CONTROL DEVICEJanuary 2017August 2018Abandon2000NoNo
13996323PUSH MANAGEMENT SCHEMEJune 2013September 2014Allow1520YesNo
13861839System and Method for Testing Automated Provisioning and Maintenance of Operations Support SystemsApril 2013September 2014Allow1710NoNo
13657323METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING AND RECEIVING CONTROL INFORMATION IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMOctober 2012July 2014Allow2000NoNo
13327560METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPORTING MODULATION-CODING SCHEME SET IN VERY HIGH THROUGHPUT WIRELESS SYSTEMSDecember 2011September 2014Allow3311NoNo
13266142COMMUNICATION APPARTUS, COMMUNICATION METHOD, COMPUTER PROGRAM, AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMOctober 2011September 2014Allow3520YesNo
13266158WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHODOctober 2011September 2014Allow3530YesNo
13141922METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ENABLING END-USER EQUIPMENT AT AN END-USER PREMISE TO EFFECT COMMUNICATIONS HAVING CERTAIN ORIGINS WHEN AN ABILITY OF THE END-USER EQUIPMENT TO COMMUNICATE VIA A COMMUNICATION LINK CONNECTING THE END-USER EQUIPMENT TO A COMMUNICATIONS NETWORSeptember 2011August 2014Allow3720NoNo
13214504APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING VALIDITY OF WIFI CONNECTION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMAugust 2011September 2014Allow3620YesNo
13194453SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF COMMUNICATION USING TUNNELED DIRECT LINK SETUP (TDLS)July 2011July 2014Allow3620NoNo
12644996VOICE QUALITY ANALYSIS DEVICE AND METHOD THEREOFDecember 2009August 2014Allow5550YesNo
11746504MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING RF COIL DECOUPLING CIRCUITMay 2007November 2009Allow3030NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A.

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
6.4%
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 RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A works in Art Unit 2831 and has examined 21 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 57.1%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 30 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A's allowance rate of 57.1% places them in the 18% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A receive 1.76 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 39% 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 RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A is 30 months. This places the examiner in the 60% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +42.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A. This interview benefit is in the 89% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 38.9% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 89% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 18.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 21% 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 13% 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.

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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 24% 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 31% 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:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.

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.