USPTO Examiner AZIZ ABDULMAJEED - Art Unit 2875

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18770053FLAME PROTECTED OPTICJuly 2024February 2025Allow710NoNo
18386071LAMP FOR AN ARTIFICIAL SKYLIGHTNovember 2023May 2025Abandon1820NoNo
18385364HEAT SINK, SEPARATOR, AND LIGHTING DEVICE APPLYING SAMEOctober 2023May 2024Allow600NoNo
18457065LED LUMINAIRE THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMAugust 2023June 2025Abandon2110NoNo
18224257Adjustable Depth Anchoring System for an Underwater LightJuly 2023August 2024Abandon1310NoNo
18206782INTEGRATED ELECTRONIC COMPONENT IN VEHICLE BODYJune 2023February 2024Allow900NoNo
18328112LIGHT EMITTING DIODE STRUCTURE AND BACKLIGHT MODULEJune 2023February 2024Allow800NoNo
18143616SURFACE MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE AND HEAT DISSIPATING STRUCTURE FOR SAMEMay 2023February 2024Allow1000NoNo
17918980BATTERY APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ESTIMATING BATTERY STATEOctober 2022November 2025Allow3720YesNo
17879517LAMP ASSEMBLY WITH THERMAL TRANSPORTERAugust 2022May 2024Allow2130NoNo
17704146WAVELENGTH CONVERSION APPARATUS, LIGHT SOURCE APPARATUS, PROJECTOR, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING WAVELENGTH CONVERSION APPARATUSMarch 2022August 2024Abandon2820NoNo
17640417LED LIGHT STRIP SUBSTRATE, LED LIGHT STRIP AND TERMINAL DEVICEMarch 2022October 2024Abandon3110NoNo
17685397LIGHT EMITTING DEVICEMarch 2022April 2024Allow2500NoNo
17635639LIGHTING SYSTEM PROVIDING COMBINED DIRECTIONAL AND AMBIENT LIGHTFebruary 2022July 2024Abandon4130NoNo
17578828Systems, Methods, and Interfaces for Smart Contract Based Exchanges Via a BlockchainJanuary 2022February 2024Abandon2410YesNo
17621060LIGHT-EMITTING WINDOW ELEMENT AND MOTOR VEHICLE COMPRISING A LIGHT-EMITTING WINDOW ELEMENTDecember 2021May 2024Allow2910NoNo
17548596LIGHT EMITTING DEVICEDecember 2021February 2024Allow2610YesNo
17618170BACKLIGHT UNIT USING SEMICONDUCTOR LIGHT-EMITTING ELEMENTDecember 2021March 2024Allow2720NoNo
17532198BACKLIGHT UNIT AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAMENovember 2021May 2024Allow2910NoNo
17469849FINANCIAL PLANNING SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREOFSeptember 2021January 2024Abandon2810NoNo
17375269METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SECURE IDENTITY TRANSMISSION WITH INTEGRATED SERVICE NETWORK AND APPLICATION ECOSYSTEMJuly 2021January 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17309405INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAMMay 2021January 2024Abandon3220NoNo
17219221SURFACE LIGHT SOURCE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SURFACE LIGHT SOURCEMarch 2021March 2024Allow3521NoNo
17204294METHOD FOR OPERATING ELECTRONIC DEVICE, APPARATUS AND STORAGE MEDIUM THEREOFMarch 2021January 2024Abandon3421YesNo
17004670Universal Symbol System Language-One World LanguageAugust 2020January 2024Abandon4140NoNo
17003337PEER-TO-PEER DIGITAL TRANSACTION DETAIL ERROR REDUCTIONAugust 2020October 2024Abandon5020YesYes
16920280Transaction Lifecycle MonitoringJuly 2020January 2024Abandon4340YesNo
16612943System, Method, and Apparatus for Processing a Merchant Redemption VoucherNovember 2019January 2024Abandon5050YesNo
16655343TRANSFERS USING CREDIT ACCOUNTSOctober 2019September 2024Abandon5961YesYes
16656078CARD-PAYMENT-SYSTEM BACK-UP PROCESSING FOR FAILED REAL-TIME PAYMENT SYSTEM TRANSACTIONOctober 2019November 2024Abandon6071YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
3
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
13.4%
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
7.3%
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 AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED works in Art Unit 2875 and has examined 16 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 31.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 35 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED's allowance rate of 31.2% places them in the 4% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED receive 2.75 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 80% 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 AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED 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 -30.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by AZIZ, ABDULMAJEED. This interview benefit is in the 1% 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, 4.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 2% 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 10.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 10% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 0.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 1% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 99% 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 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 40.0% of allowed cases (in the 96% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • 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.
  • 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.

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.