USPTO Examiner SAUNCY TONI DIAN - Art Unit 2857

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19203800MECHANICAL SENDING UNIT BASEMay 2025March 2026Abandon1010NoNo
18267124METHOD FOR DETERMINING CONTACT OR CONNECTION STATE, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICEJune 2023February 2026Allow3210YesNo
18195486METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ESTIMATING THE OPERATIONAL STATUS OF AN ELECTRICAL GENERATOR IN A DISTRIBUTED ENERGY RESOURCE SYSTEMMay 2023February 2026Allow3410YesNo
18030333Battery Monitoring Device, Battery Monitoring Method, Battery Pack and Electric VehicleApril 2023December 2025Allow3210NoNo
18117293ANOMALY DETECTION IN HIGH-VOLTAGE BUS SYSTEMSMarch 2023February 2026Allow3510NoNo
18176486METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR LOCATING FAULT OF COMPLEX POWER LINE, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMMarch 2023January 2026Allow3410NoNo
18016708IN-SITU STRESS MEASUREMENT METHODJanuary 2023December 2025Allow3520NoNo
18153301ELECTRICAL GRID DISCREPANCY IDENTIFICATIONJanuary 2023October 2025Allow3310YesNo
18004883PORTABLE BLOWING TYPE ALCOHOL CONCENTRATION MEASURING DEVICE AND MEASURING METHODJanuary 2023January 2026Allow3720NoNo
17618280METHOD FOR OPTIMIZING A SURROUNDINGS MODELFebruary 2022November 2025Allow4820NoNo

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 SAUNCY, TONI DIAN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner SAUNCY, TONI DIAN works in Art Unit 2857 and has examined 1 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 48 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner SAUNCY, TONI DIAN'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 SAUNCY, TONI DIAN receive 2.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by SAUNCY, TONI DIAN is 48 months. This places the examiner in the 8% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 97% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 2% 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.

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:

  • 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.
  • 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.