USPTO Examiner RODAK LEE E - Art Unit 2858

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17131142MAGNETIC SENSOR AND ITS MANUFACTURING METHODDecember 2020October 2022Allow2100NoNo
17124417Pin-Type Probes for Contacting Electronic Circuits and Methods for Making Such ProbesDecember 2020June 2023Abandon3020NoNo
17111036PROBE DEVICE AND METHOD OF ASSEMBLING THE SAMEDecember 2020April 2023Abandon2930NoNo
17078778PROBE SYSTEMS INCLUDING IMAGING DEVICES WITH OBJECTIVE LENS ISOLATORS, AND RELATED METHODSOctober 2020October 2023Allow3510NoNo
17062954ELECTRO-OPTICAL CIRCUIT BOARD FOR CONTACTING PHOTONIC INTEGRATED CIRCUITSOctober 2020November 2023Allow3811YesNo
17038642MULTILAYER WIRING SUBSTRATE, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME, AND PROBE CARD HAVING SAMESeptember 2020August 2023Allow3511NoNo
17029979PROBE CARD FOR TESTING A PATTERN FORMED ON A WAFERSeptember 2020January 2023Allow2820NoNo
16981073METHOD FOR ELECTRICALLY CONNECTING A TEST PIECE TO AN ELECTRICAL TEST DEVICESeptember 2020April 2023Abandon3120NoNo
17007423Self Flattening Test Socket With Anti-Bowing And Elastomer RetentionAugust 2020February 2023Allow3000YesNo
16967280Evaluation Apparatus for Semiconductor DeviceAugust 2020March 2023Allow3240NoNo
16646139DYNAMIC MAGNETIC FIELD DETECTION PROBE AND ARRAY CONTROL METHODJuly 2020April 2023Abandon3710NoNo
16960434Capacitive Test Needle for Measuring Electrically Conductive Layers in Printed Circuit Board HolesJuly 2020May 2023Allow3520NoNo
16912021SHORT-CIRCUIT PROBE CARD, WAFER TEST SYSTEM, AND FAULT DETECTION METHOD FOR THE WAFER TEST SYSTEMJune 2020September 2023Allow3911NoNo
16907450Method for determining sheet resistanceJune 2020February 2023Allow3210NoNo
16765843DEVICE FOR DETERMINING THE MOISTURE AND/OR THE CONDUCTIVITY OF A MEDIUMMay 2020September 2022Allow2810NoNo
16868587Inductive Position Sensing Apparatus Including A Screening Layer And Method For The SameMay 2020March 2023Allow3430YesNo
16864700MEASUREMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A MEASUREMENT SYSTEMMay 2020January 2023Allow3340YesNo
16858369PROBE TEST CARD AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAMEApril 2020September 2022Allow2920YesNo
16757168CERAMIC, PROBE GUIDING MEMBER, PROBE CARD, AND SOCKET FOR PACKAGE INSPECTIONApril 2020January 2024Allow4550NoNo
16754142SPRING PROBEApril 2020May 2022Abandon2510NoNo
16841042BUS-COMPATIBLE SENSOR ELEMENT AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMApril 2020July 2023Allow4020NoNo
16837614AMR (XMR) SENSOR WITH INCREASED LINEAR RANGEApril 2020March 2023Allow3520NoNo
16743540Method and Device for Testing Adaptor, and Storage MediumJanuary 2020October 2022Allow3310NoNo
16732342INDUCTOR WITH AN ELECTRODE STRUCTUREJanuary 2020May 2023Allow4020NoNo
16689619MAGNETIC CORE FOR A CURRENT MEASUREMENT SENSORNovember 2019April 2023Abandon4120NoNo
16612417MAGNETIC SENSORNovember 2019August 2023Abandon4530NoNo
16677502CALIBRATION OF A HUMIDITY SENSOR DEVICENovember 2019October 2022Allow3620NoNo
16578586FLUX GATE SENSOR CIRCUITSeptember 2019October 2022Allow3621YesNo
16550071TESTING HEAD WITH IMPROVED FREQUENCY PROPERTYAugust 2019March 2023Allow4250YesNo
15836534SEMICONDUCTOR INTEGRATED FLUXGATE DEVICE SHIELDED BY DISCRETE MAGNETIC PLATEDecember 2017December 2022Allow6021NoYes
14890652Closure for Measuring Voltage on Power-Carrying ConductorsNovember 2015April 2017Allow1710YesNo
14890261INSPECTION CIRCUIT FOR MAGNETIC FIELD DETECTOR, AND INSPECTION METHOD FOR THE SAMENovember 2015July 2017Allow2000NoNo
14574398SEQUENTIAL ACCESS ASSEMBLY STRIP TEST ADAPTERDecember 2014April 2017Allow2810NoNo
14314706MAGNETOMETER UNIT FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICESJune 2014July 2017Allow3610YesNo
14365873INDUCTIVE POWER TRANSFER SYSTEM AND METHODJune 2014February 2025Allow6071NoYes
14304035SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING AND LOCALIZING NON-TECHNICAL LOSSES IN AN ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION GRIDJune 2014February 2018Allow4440NoYes
14000025SYSTEM AND METHOD OF MONITORING THE WAVEFORM OF THE VOLTAGE OF THE ELECTRICAL GRIDNovember 2013February 2016Allow3010NoNo
13834039SCREENING METHODOLOGY TO ELIMINATE WIRE SWEEP IN BOND AND ASSEMBLY MODULE PACKAGINGMarch 2013July 2016Allow4040YesNo
13786825ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE MEASUREMENT APPARATUS AND ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE MEASUREMENT METHODMarch 2013March 2016Allow3640NoNo
13767683INTEGRATED GALVANICALLY ISOLATED METER DEVICES AND METHODS FOR MAKING INTEGRATED GALVANICALLY ISOLATED METER DEVICESFebruary 2013October 2015Allow3221NoNo
13752668MULTI-BRANCH CURRENT/VOLTAGE SENSOR ARRAYJanuary 2013December 2015Allow3410YesNo
13653072INTEGRATED REAL POWER DETECTOROctober 2012October 2017Allow6060YesNo
13647719RING OSCILLATOR TESTING WITH POWER SENSING RESISTOROctober 2012September 2015Allow3531YesNo
13524516DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, MOTHER SUBSTRATE FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE DISPLAY SUBSTRATEJune 2012October 2015Allow4030NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RODAK, LEE E.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
2
Examiner Affirmed
2
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
12.8%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
6.8%
Lower than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

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.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner RODAK, LEE E - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RODAK, LEE E works in Art Unit 2858 and has examined 44 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 84.1%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 35 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RODAK, LEE E's allowance rate of 84.1% places them in the 60% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by RODAK, LEE E receive 2.23 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 58% 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 RODAK, LEE E is 35 months. This places the examiner in the 40% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +22.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RODAK, LEE E. This interview benefit is in the 66% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 32.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 49% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 100.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 60.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 36% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 33.3% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 45% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

    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.