Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17135450 | Display Apparatus Having a Substrate Hole and Method for Forming the Same | December 2020 | May 2025 | Allow | 52 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17113837 | LIGHT EMITTING DISPLAY DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF | December 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 48 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17112758 | DISPLAY DEVICE | December 2020 | April 2025 | Allow | 52 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17106150 | LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE FOR DISPLAY AND DISPLAY APPARATUS HAVING THE SAME | November 2020 | May 2024 | Allow | 42 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17105562 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE | November 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17073737 | METHOD FOR PRODUCING A PHOTOEMITTING OR PHOTORECEIVING DIODE | October 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 51 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17034431 | COLOR FILM SUBSTRATE, DISPLAY PANEL, AND DISPLAY DEVICE | September 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17007799 | THROUGH SEMICONDUCTOR VIA STRUCTURE WITH REDUCED STRESS PROXIMITY EFFECT | August 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16943054 | ENCAPSULATED PACKAGE WITH CARRIER, LAMINATE BODY AND COMPONENT IN BETWEEN | July 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 58 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16936775 | LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE, AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS | July 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16933919 | DISPLAY DEVICE | July 2020 | October 2024 | Allow | 51 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16918080 | BACKLIGHT SOURCE MANUFACTURING METHOD, BACKLIGHT SOURCE, AND DISPLAY APPARATUS | July 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 16771454 | DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY DEVICE | June 2020 | December 2024 | Allow | 54 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15931317 | COLOR PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUS INCLUDING THE SAME | May 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 43 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16861488 | ORGANIC LIGHT-EMITTING DISPLAY APPARATUS | April 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16858735 | DISPLAY APPARATUS | April 2020 | April 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16742973 | REDUCING THE PLANARITY VARIATION IN A DISPLAY DEVICE | January 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 52 | 4 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 16691730 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE | November 2019 | May 2023 | Allow | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16674321 | DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME | November 2019 | September 2023 | Allow | 47 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16440218 | SUBSTRATELESS DOUBLE-SIDED EMBEDDED MULTI-DIE INTERCONNECT BRIDGE | June 2019 | March 2025 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16378568 | SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND METHOD OF FORMING THE SAME | April 2019 | March 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 7 | 2 | Yes | Yes |
| 16105745 | METHODS FOR DEPOSITING A MOLYBDENUM METAL FILM ON A DIELECTRIC SURFACE OF A SUBSTRATE AND RELATED SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE STRUCTURES | August 2018 | October 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16105761 | METHODS FOR FILLING A GAP FEATURE ON A SUBSTRATE SURFACE AND RELATED SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE STRUCTURES | August 2018 | June 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 14722236 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE | May 2015 | December 2017 | Allow | 30 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14411686 | PRODUCTION METHOD FOR JOINED BODY | December 2014 | November 2017 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 13904744 | Silicidation Blocking Process Using Optically Sensitive HSQ Resist and Organic Planarizing Layer | May 2013 | May 2015 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 13677566 | LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE AND LIGHT EMITTING APPARATUS HAVING THE SAME | November 2012 | March 2016 | Allow | 40 | 4 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 13677696 | SEMICONDUCTOR LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE | November 2012 | August 2015 | Allow | 33 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 13337631 | LIGHT-EMITTING UNIT, LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE, LIGHTING DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING LIGHT-EMITTING UNIT | December 2011 | January 2015 | Allow | 37 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 13101155 | POWER SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE WITH ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE STRUCTURE | May 2011 | August 2015 | Allow | 52 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 12725478 | SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME | March 2010 | August 2014 | Allow | 53 | 2 | 2 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BELL, LAUREN R.
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.
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.
⚠ 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 BELL, LAUREN R works in Art Unit 2896 and has examined 31 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 61.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 48 months.
Examiner BELL, LAUREN R's allowance rate of 61.3% places them in the 23% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by BELL, LAUREN R receive 4.16 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 97% 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BELL, LAUREN R is 48 months. This places the examiner in the 10% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -6.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BELL, LAUREN R. This interview benefit is in the 5% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 19.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 22% 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.
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 3% 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 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 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 28.6% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 15% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.
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.