USPTO Examiner MELLINGER CORBYN DAVID - Art Unit 2899

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18898541COOLING CHANNEL SHAPE WITH SUBSTANTIALLY CONSTANT CROSS SECTIONAL AREASeptember 2024October 2025Allow1240YesNo
18784639FLUID CHANNEL GEOMETRY OPTIMIZATIONS TO IMPROVE COOLING EFFICIENCYJuly 2024April 2025Allow830YesNo
18317117SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE COMPRISING POWER DELIVER NETWORK STRUCTUREMay 2023January 2026Allow3210NoNo
18313526INTERPOSER FOR IMPLEMENTING FLIP-CHIP DIES IN WIREBONDED CIRCUIT ASSEMBLIESMay 2023May 2025Allow2420NoNo
18150569SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE PACKAGES AND METHODS OF FORMATIONJanuary 2023February 2026Allow3710NoNo
18010570SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICEDecember 2022October 2025Allow3410NoNo
17972215SEMICONDUCTOR MODULE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR MODULEOctober 2022December 2025Allow3810NoNo
17954122PACKAGED ELECTRONIC DEVICE WITH SUSPENDED MAGNETIC SUBASSEMBLYSeptember 2022September 2025Allow3520NoNo
17946501SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICESeptember 2022October 2025Allow3721YesNo
17943224INTERCONNECT STRUCTURESeptember 2022January 2026Allow4030NoNo
17823654METHOD FOR PRODUCING A SUPERCONDUCTING VANADIUM SILICIDE ON A SILICON LAYERAugust 2022June 2025Allow3310YesNo
17865565Memory Circuitry And Method Used In Forming Memory CircuitryJuly 2022July 2025Allow3601NoNo
17806499METHOD OF MANUFACTURING MICRO DEVICESJune 2022May 2025Allow3520NoNo
17750586SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAMEMay 2022December 2024Allow3101NoNo
17703254METHODS FOR OXIDIZING A SILICON HARDMASK USING ION IMPLANTMarch 2022December 2025Allow4430YesNo
17694862MEMORY DEVICE HAVING DOUBLE SIDED CAPACITORMarch 2022October 2025Abandon4340NoNo
17682829SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICEFebruary 2022April 2025Allow3720NoNo
17680507SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAMEFebruary 2022January 2025Allow3510YesNo
17680368STACKED RANDOM-ACCESS MEMORY DEVICES WITH REFRIGERATIONFebruary 2022January 2026Allow4720YesNo
17650127GRAPHIC ELEMENT STRUCTURE AND GRAPHIC ARRAY STRUCTUREFebruary 2022May 2025Abandon3910NoNo
17350175GLASS PACKAGE CORE WITH PLANAR STRUCTURESJune 2021November 2025Abandon5321NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner MELLINGER, CORBYN DAVID - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MELLINGER, CORBYN DAVID works in Art Unit 2899 and has examined 1 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 0.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MELLINGER, CORBYN DAVID's allowance rate of 0.0% places them in the 0% 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 MELLINGER, CORBYN DAVID receive 2.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% 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 MELLINGER, CORBYN DAVID is 53 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

After-Final Amendment Practice

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 2% 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.

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.

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.
  • 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.
  • 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.