USPTO Examiner WAS ENGLEHART LEANNE D - Art Unit 2934

Examiner Information

Name: WAS-ENGLEHART, LEANNE D
Art Unit: 2934
Total Cases: 1
Last Active: April 2025

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
29997641Gate WheelApril 2025September 2025Allow610NoNo
29995830LIGHT FIXTUREMarch 2025December 2025Allow800NoNo
29987827SWING GATE PLATEJanuary 2025September 2025Allow810NoNo
35523188Accident Prevention BarrierNovember 2024March 2026Allow1501NoNo
29960968RAILING BRACKETSeptember 2024January 2026Allow1610NoNo
35521924Window FrameMay 2024December 2025Allow1901YesNo
29927490MEAT PROBE HOUSINGFebruary 2024October 2025Allow2100NoNo
29924625DOORJanuary 2024October 2025Allow2100NoNo
29924163IRRIGATION CONTROLLERJanuary 2024October 2025Allow2100NoNo
29919043Safety gateDecember 2023November 2025Allow2400NoNo
29916618LEVEL CABLE SPACER RODNovember 2023November 2025Allow2400NoNo
35522632Glass PanelOctober 2023March 2026Allow2920YesNo
35522535Column ShoeOctober 2023November 2025Allow2510NoNo
29877194DOORJune 2023December 2025Allow3020NoNo
29875377VEHICLE WARNING LIGHTMay 2023October 2025Allow2901NoNo
29890140Door AssemblyApril 2023November 2025Allow3010NoNo
29873634WALLApril 2023October 2025Allow3110NoNo
29858222VIDEO CONFERENCE SYSTEMOctober 2022September 2025Allow3500YesNo
29794384Drill BitJune 2021January 2024Allow3121NoNo

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 WAS-ENGLEHART, LEANNE D - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner WAS-ENGLEHART, LEANNE D works in Art Unit 2934 and has examined 1 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 31 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner WAS-ENGLEHART, LEANNE D's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 98% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by WAS-ENGLEHART, LEANNE D 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 WAS-ENGLEHART, LEANNE D is 31 months. This places the examiner in the 56% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 31% 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 200.0% of allowed cases (in the 100% 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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

    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.