USPTO Examiner FABIAN JR ROBERTO - Art Unit 2877

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17251875METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE PATH OF A MEASUREMENT BEAM OF AN INTERFEROMETRIC MEASURING DEVICE, AND MEASURING DEVICE FOR INTERFEROMETRIC MEASUREMENT OF AN OBJECT UNDER MEASUREMENTDecember 2020May 2024Allow4120YesNo
16973557A METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ASSAYING THE INTERACTION AND DYNAMICS OF PERMEATION OF A MOLECULE AND A LIPID BILAYERDecember 2020October 2023Allow3430YesNo
15734972METHOD AND DEVICE FOR ALIGNING A LASER AND A WAVEGUIDEDecember 2020July 2024Allow4310NoNo
17105259Shape-Sensing Systems with Filters and Methods ThereofNovember 2020July 2022Allow2000NoNo
16952512OPTICAL FILTER AND SPECTROMETER INCLUDING THE OPTICAL FILTERNovember 2020May 2023Allow3020YesNo
17055314METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MEASURING TRANSMITTANCE OF QUARTZ CRUCIBLENovember 2020May 2023Allow3030YesNo
17077700APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ANALYZING SUBSTANCE OF OBJECTOctober 2020April 2024Allow4250YesNo
16978086OPTICAL MODULATION MICRO-NANO STRUCTURE, MICRO-INTEGRATED SPECTROMETER AND SPECTRUM MODULATION METHODSeptember 2020January 2024Abandon4040YesNo
16997248METHOD FOR RESTRICTING LASER BEAMS ENTERING AN APERTURE TO A CHOSEN DYAD AND MEASURING THEIR SEPARATIONAugust 2020September 2022Allow2410NoNo
16900539EUV In-Situ Linearity Calibration for TDI Image Sensors Using Test PhotomasksJune 2020April 2023Allow3421YesNo
16723196Methods And Systems For Control Of Nonlinear Light TransmissionDecember 2019April 2023Allow4020YesNo
16478037MONOMOLECULAR SUBSTRATE STRAIN SENSING DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOFJuly 2019May 2023Abandon4620NoNo
16429423METHOD FOR FABRICATING AN OPTICAL SOURCE FOR CALIBRATING AN OPTICAL SYSTEMJune 2019October 2023Abandon5230NoNo
16089467INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR REAL-TIME ANTI-FOULING AND BIOFOULING MONITORINGSeptember 2018April 2023Allow5430YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner FABIAN JR, ROBERTO.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
97.7%
Higher 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, 100.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner FABIAN JR, ROBERTO - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner FABIAN JR, ROBERTO works in Art Unit 2877 and has examined 14 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 78.6%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 40 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner FABIAN JR, ROBERTO's allowance rate of 78.6% places them in the 48% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by FABIAN JR, ROBERTO receive 2.36 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 63% 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 FABIAN JR, ROBERTO is 40 months. This places the examiner in the 24% 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 +28.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by FABIAN JR, ROBERTO. This interview benefit is in the 75% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 27.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 50% 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 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 95% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 80.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 83% 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 28% 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 35% 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:

  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • 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.