Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18583338 | DEVICE AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING SIGNAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | February 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18560468 | SHORT SIGNALING TRANSMISSION FOR SIDELINK COMMUNICATION IN UNLICENSED SPECTRUM | November 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18453448 | CARD EDGE CONNECTOR WITH REDUCED HEIGHT | August 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18355462 | Shield Contact Element and Method of Manufacturing Such a Shield Contact Element | July 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18331226 | TERMINAL UNIT, AND CONNECTOR INCLUDING THE SAME | June 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18196585 | ELECTRICAL CONNECTOR WITH AN IMPROVED SHIELDING TUBE | May 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18196328 | CONNECTION ELEMENT FOR ELECTRICALLY CONNECTING A FLUID-COOLABLE INDIVIDUAL LINE, FLUID-COOLABLE INDIVIDUAL LINE UNIT, AND CHARGING CABLE | May 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18306823 | CONNECTOR MODULE | April 2023 | February 2026 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18133601 | RELIABLE, ROBUST CARD EDGE CONNECTOR | April 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18104074 | CONDUCTOR HAVING AN INNER CONDUCTOR ENGAGER | January 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18002257 | TELECOMMUNICATIONS JACK ADAPTER | December 2022 | July 2025 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18074599 | UNLOCKING ELEMENT AND ELECTRICAL PLUG-IN PROVIDED THEREWITH | December 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17939885 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC COMPONENT | September 2022 | March 2025 | Allow | 30 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17871611 | DIFFERENTIAL I/O CARD USING CMT CONNECTOR | July 2022 | March 2026 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17202961 | BALL GRID ARRAY CARD EDGE CONNECTOR | March 2021 | February 2025 | Allow | 47 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17251436 | A SYSTEM AND A METHOD FOR UNLOCKING ITEM/S | December 2020 | April 2025 | Abandon | 53 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16791952 | INSULATED SOCKET BODY AND TERMINALS FOR A LAND GRID ARRAY SOCKET ASSEMBLY | February 2020 | March 2021 | Abandon | 13 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16578518 | CONNECTION TERMINAL FOR PCB BOARDS | September 2019 | July 2021 | Abandon | 22 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16540616 | LEVER TYPE CONNECTOR | August 2019 | August 2021 | Abandon | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16377816 | MULTI-PIECE CASSETTE | April 2019 | March 2021 | Abandon | 23 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16019375 | Flexible Twisted Cable With End Connectors | June 2018 | December 2021 | Abandon | 42 | 2 | 1 | No | Yes |
| 15618735 | HEATER CONTROL APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING HEATER FOR BATTERY | June 2017 | July 2019 | Abandon | 25 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 15439523 | FUEL CELL DRIVING METHOD, FUEL CELL SYSTEM, AND VEHICLE | February 2017 | February 2019 | Abandon | 23 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 15325423 | CONTROL METHOD FOR FUEL CELL SYSTEM, FUEL CELL SYSTEM, AND POWER CONTROL DEVICE | January 2017 | August 2018 | Abandon | 20 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13996323 | PUSH MANAGEMENT SCHEME | June 2013 | September 2014 | Allow | 15 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13861839 | System and Method for Testing Automated Provisioning and Maintenance of Operations Support Systems | April 2013 | September 2014 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13657323 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING AND RECEIVING CONTROL INFORMATION IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | October 2012 | July 2014 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13327560 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPORTING MODULATION-CODING SCHEME SET IN VERY HIGH THROUGHPUT WIRELESS SYSTEMS | December 2011 | September 2014 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 13266142 | COMMUNICATION APPARTUS, COMMUNICATION METHOD, COMPUTER PROGRAM, AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | October 2011 | September 2014 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13266158 | WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD | October 2011 | September 2014 | Allow | 35 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13141922 | METHODS 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 NETWOR | September 2011 | August 2014 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13214504 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING VALIDITY OF WIFI CONNECTION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM | August 2011 | September 2014 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13194453 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF COMMUNICATION USING TUNNELED DIRECT LINK SETUP (TDLS) | July 2011 | July 2014 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12644996 | VOICE QUALITY ANALYSIS DEVICE AND METHOD THEREOF | December 2009 | August 2014 | Allow | 55 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11746504 | MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING RF COIL DECOUPLING CIRCUIT | May 2007 | November 2009 | Allow | 30 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A.
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.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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'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.
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.