USPTO Examiner HAMMOND CRYSTAL L - Art Unit 2845

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18411533PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUSJanuary 2024June 2025Allow1700NoNo
18390908CIRCUIT, FAN SYSTEM, AND TRANSFORMER FOR POWER CONVERSIONDecember 2023June 2025Allow1800NoNo
18561671VEHICLE-MOUNTED ANTENNA SYSTEMNovember 2023June 2025Allow1900NoNo
18561572TERMINAL ANTENNANovember 2023June 2025Allow1900NoNo
18290212WIDE BAND DUAL-POLARIZED PLANAR ANTENNA ARRAYNovember 2023May 2025Allow1900NoNo
15323233OPTOELECTRONIC CIRCUIT WITH LOW-FLICKER LIGHT-EMITTING DIODESDecember 2016October 2017Allow910NoNo
15228576LIGHTING SYSTEM, LIGHTING DEVICE, AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFAugust 2016September 2017Allow1320NoNo
14413146SOLID LIGHT SOURCE LIGHTING DEVICE, ILLUMINATION APPARATUS, AND ILLUMINATION SYSTEMJanuary 2015August 2015Allow700NoNo
14581173WIRING BOARDS FOR ARRAY-BASED ELECTRONIC DEVICESDecember 2014March 2015Allow300NoNo
14186632ILLUMINATING DEVICEFebruary 2014April 2015Allow1410NoNo
14021510FIELD EMISSION DEVICESeptember 2013March 2014Allow700NoNo
13970027WIRING BOARDS FOR ARRAY-BASED ELECTRONIC DEVICESAugust 2013November 2013Allow300NoNo
13608460Lighting Power Source and LuminaireSeptember 2012March 2014Allow1800NoNo
13579321HID LIGHTING SYSTEMAugust 2012February 2014Allow1800NoNo
13441310BALLAST STRUCTURE USED FOR HIGH-INTENSITY DISCHARGE LAMPApril 2012January 2014Allow2100NoNo
13350796LIGHT EMITTING DIODE DRIVING INTEGRATED CIRCUIT AND METHOD FOR DRIVING A SERIES OF LIGHT EMITTING DIODESJanuary 2012January 2014Allow2410NoNo
13350249FEED FORWARD IMBALANCE CORRECTOR CIRCUITJanuary 2012August 2013Allow2000NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner HAMMOND, CRYSTAL L - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HAMMOND, CRYSTAL L works in Art Unit 2845 and has examined 16 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 18 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HAMMOND, CRYSTAL L's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 99% 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 HAMMOND, CRYSTAL L receive 0.31 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by HAMMOND, CRYSTAL L is 18 months. This places the examiner in the 94% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 99% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 3% 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 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 28% 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.

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.