Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29947494 | HANGER | June 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 15 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29946825 | DENTAL IMPLANT ABUTMENT | June 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29946828 | DENTAL IMPLANT ABUTMENT | June 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 29942877 | DENTAL MOUTHPIECE | May 2024 | June 2025 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29941380 | MAGNETIC RESONANCE CROSS-LAYER DIAGNOSTIC MACHINE | May 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29941280 | CLOTHES HANGER | May 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29933255 | Intimate Paper Hanger | March 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29932366 | Clothes Hanger | March 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29666753 | FLAT SWITCH AND A FLAT SWITCH MODULE THEREOF | October 2018 | November 2018 | Abandon | 1 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29663907 | HEADPHONES | September 2018 | October 2018 | Allow | 1 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29610792 | Toilet Brush | July 2017 | September 2018 | Allow | 14 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 29585396 | TREE STAND | November 2016 | September 2017 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29576783 | SHOE | September 2016 | August 2017 | Allow | 11 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 29547191 | SHOE UPPER | December 2015 | February 2017 | Allow | 15 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29545457 | FOOTWEAR | November 2015 | August 2016 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29542980 | GOLF CLUB HEAD | October 2015 | December 2015 | Allow | 2 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29533182 | TOY | July 2015 | February 2017 | Allow | 20 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 29522216 | Cable connector | March 2015 | November 2015 | Allow | 8 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29501053 | COMPONENT FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICE | August 2014 | September 2015 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29492554 | SHOE UPPER | May 2014 | July 2014 | Allow | 2 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29492553 | SHOE UPPER | May 2014 | October 2014 | Allow | 5 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29492552 | SHOE UPPER | May 2014 | July 2014 | Allow | 2 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29492551 | SHOE UPPER | May 2014 | August 2014 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29492292 | SWITCH | May 2014 | December 2015 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 29481899 | COOLER | February 2014 | April 2015 | Allow | 14 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29376450 | CROSS WITH INTERNAL LIGHTS AND APERTURES | October 2010 | April 2011 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 12825100 | ACOUSTIC MOUNT | June 2010 | April 2013 | Abandon | 33 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner SIMMONS, IAN works in Art Unit 2912 and has examined 19 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 89.5%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 9 months.
Examiner SIMMONS, IAN's allowance rate of 89.5% places them in the 72% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by SIMMONS, IAN receive 0.37 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by SIMMONS, IAN is 9 months. This places the examiner in the 100% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 0.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 1% 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 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 99% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 92% 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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 29% 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 23.5% of allowed cases (in the 94% 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.
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.