Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16984767 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DAMAGE EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL ASSETS | August 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 16822106 | Method for Detecting Fatigue Damage of a Hydraulic Unit, and the Hydraulic Unit Thereof | March 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 49 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 13830771 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE HAVING CMOS TRANSFER CIRCUIT AND CLAMP ELEMENT | March 2013 | June 2013 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13696021 | EDDY CURRENT SENSOR AND EDDY CURRENT MEASUREMENT METHOD | November 2012 | September 2013 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 12525051 | STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES FOR FABRICATION OF PROBE CARD ASSEMBLIES WITH MULTI-LAYER INTERCONNECT | May 2010 | September 2013 | Allow | 50 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12677890 | IN SITU MEMBRANE MONITORING | March 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 41 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 12710149 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR INSPECTING CIRCUIT OF SUBSTRATE | February 2010 | August 2013 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 12694914 | TRANSMISSION-MODULATED PHOTOCONDUCTIVE DECAY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM | January 2010 | July 2013 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner VAZQUEZ, ARLEEN M works in Art Unit 2857 and has examined 8 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 75.0%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 42 months.
Examiner VAZQUEZ, ARLEEN M's allowance rate of 75.0% places them in the 42% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by VAZQUEZ, ARLEEN M receive 2.25 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 59% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by VAZQUEZ, ARLEEN M is 42 months. This places the examiner in the 19% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +33.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by VAZQUEZ, ARLEEN M. This interview benefit is in the 80% 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, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 41% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.
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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 92% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 27% 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 34% 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.