Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17129737 | VAPOR PHASE EPITAXY METHOD | December 2020 | September 2023 | Allow | 33 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17129744 | VAPOR PHASE EPITAXY METHOD | December 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 38 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17129732 | VAPOR PHASE EPITAXY METHOD | December 2020 | July 2025 | Allow | 54 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 17123264 | Process of Forming an Electronic Device Including a Doped Gate Electrode | December 2020 | January 2024 | Allow | 37 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17113073 | METHOD FOR INCREASING PHOTORESIST ETCH SELECTIVITY TO ENABLE HIGH ENERGY HOT IMPLANT IN SIC DEVICES | December 2020 | October 2022 | Allow | 22 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17073591 | MAGNETIC TUNNEL JUNCTION MEMORY CELL WITH A BUFFER-LAYER AND METHODS FOR FORMING THE SAME | October 2020 | July 2023 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17065931 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE | October 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17035591 | SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND FABRICATION METHOD THEREOF | September 2020 | May 2023 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17033695 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF THE SAME | September 2020 | November 2022 | Allow | 25 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17033102 | SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND FABRICATION METHOD THEREOF | September 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17029726 | SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND FABRICATION METHOD THEREOF | September 2020 | May 2024 | Allow | 43 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16997953 | THERMAL SENSOR AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF | August 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 37 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 16713656 | ESD DIODE SOLUTION FOR NANORIBBON ARCHITECTURES | December 2019 | February 2024 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner SEHAR, FAKEHA.
With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.
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.
✓ Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner SEHAR, FAKEHA works in Art Unit 2893 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 92.3%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.
Examiner SEHAR, FAKEHA's allowance rate of 92.3% places them in the 78% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by SEHAR, FAKEHA receive 2.46 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 67% 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 SEHAR, FAKEHA is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 33% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +14.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SEHAR, FAKEHA. This interview benefit is in the 52% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 27.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 52% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 30.8% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 46% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 15% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 19% 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.
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.
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.