USPTO Examiner FORRISTALL JOSHUA L - Art Unit 2857

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19176225METHOD FOR LOCATING HIGH-IMPEDANCE GROUND FAULT OF SMART DISTRIBUTION NETWORK WITH TOPOLOGY CHANGE ADAPTATIONApril 2025February 2026Allow1120YesNo
18758545METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATIC EVALUATION OF CUTTING ELEMENT DURING WEAR TESTJune 2024March 2026Abandon2020NoNo
18197433FORCE SENSORMay 2023March 2026Allow3410NoNo
18193868MATERIAL PROPERTY CHARACTERIZATION BY ACOUSTIC SYSTEMS AND METHODSMarch 2023March 2026Abandon3511NoNo
18125395DEFECT DETECTING SYSTEM OF AUTOMOTIVE APPARATUSMarch 2023February 2026Allow3510YesNo
17866686Method For Determining A Loss Of Capacity Of A Battery Storage Device, Apparatus, And Computer Program ProductJuly 2022March 2026Allow4430YesNo
17758616ROOT CAUSE ANALYTICS OF HVAC FAULTSJuly 2022January 2026Allow4240NoNo
17707559DETERMINING GROUPINGS OF TWO OR MORE BOREHOLESMarch 2022February 2025Allow3430NoNo
17682001METHOD TO PREPARE VIRTUAL ASSAY USING THERMOGRAVIMETRIC ANALYSISFebruary 2022March 2026Abandon4810NoNo
17632747DEVICE, MEASURING DEVICE, DISTANCE MEASURING SYSTEM, AND METHODFebruary 2022December 2025Allow4730NoNo
17453427Sensor Monitoring System with Cloud Based InterfaceNovember 2021March 2026Allow5250YesNo
17438405METHOD AND CONTROL DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING A ROTATIONAL SPEEDSeptember 2021November 2025Allow5030NoNo

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 FORRISTALL, JOSHUA L - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner FORRISTALL, JOSHUA L works in Art Unit 2857 and has examined 2 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 52 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner FORRISTALL, JOSHUA L's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 97% 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 FORRISTALL, JOSHUA L receive 4.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 97% 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 FORRISTALL, JOSHUA L is 52 months. This places the examiner in the 4% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by FORRISTALL, JOSHUA L. This interview benefit is in the 15% 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, 20.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 21% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 76% 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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 26% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments less often than average. You may need to make most claim amendments yourself.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 32% 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.
  • 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.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.