USPTO Examiner LEE AMBER R - Art Unit 2938

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
29989826STORAGE SHELFFebruary 2025April 2025Allow200NoNo
29986998Lap TrayJanuary 2025April 2025Allow310NoNo
29984105Children's bookshelfJanuary 2025May 2025Allow410YesNo
29982487STORAGE SHELFJanuary 2025April 2025Allow400NoNo
29968393Furniture leg coverOctober 2024January 2025Allow300NoNo
29965160Bucket Storage RackSeptember 2024April 2025Allow610NoNo
29964047BOOKSHELFSeptember 2024December 2024Allow300NoNo
29964169V Shape Base Guitar StandSeptember 2024December 2024Allow300NoNo
29953779BraJuly 2024February 2025Allow620NoNo
29921656TRAY TABLEDecember 2023February 2025Allow1400NoNo
29906076SOCKOctober 2023September 2024Allow1100NoNo
29906074SOCKOctober 2023September 2024Allow1100NoNo
29906080SOCKOctober 2023September 2024Allow1100NoNo
29906089SOCKOctober 2023February 2025Allow1510NoNo
29913239GUITAR STAND WITH PICK HOLDER AND CABLE HOLDERSeptember 2023March 2025Allow1700YesNo
29909825SOCKAugust 2023December 2024Allow1700NoNo
29894138Antler Guitar HookJune 2023December 2024Allow1900NoNo
29888510SOCKMarch 2023September 2024Allow1800NoNo
29888504SOCKMarch 2023September 2024Allow1800NoNo
29887585SHOEMarch 2023January 2025Allow2200NoNo
29872258SOCKMarch 2023December 2024Allow2200NoNo
29872040BOOTMarch 2023November 2024Allow2010NoNo
29872038BOOTMarch 2023November 2024Allow2010YesNo
29872037BOOTMarch 2023December 2024Allow2110NoNo
29884614Heel Support CushionFebruary 2023May 2025Allow2700NoNo
29870595InsoleJanuary 2023March 2025Allow2600NoNo
29870598InsoleJanuary 2023March 2025Allow2600NoNo
29881924SockJanuary 2023February 2025Allow2510NoNo
29869602ARCH SUPPORT INSOLEJanuary 2023April 2025Allow2700YesNo
29869424Trouser VentDecember 2022November 2024Allow2300YesNo
29869418Trouser VentDecember 2022November 2024Allow2300YesNo
29863413Shoe HeelDecember 2022September 2024Allow2100YesNo
29863038SHELVING UNITDecember 2022March 2025Allow2700NoNo
29868772SOCKDecember 2022February 2025Allow2610NoNo
29862499SHOEDecember 2022January 2025Allow2500NoNo
29855631Backpack Accessible GarmentOctober 2022December 2024Allow2600NoNo
29854383WEARABLE BLANKETSeptember 2022April 2025Allow3110YesNo
29849213DRESSAugust 2022July 2024Allow2300NoNo
29848538SPORTS SHIRTAugust 2022February 2025Allow3010NoNo
29847951BRAJuly 2022November 2024Allow2800NoNo
29846034SEAT PAD FOR CYCLING GARMENTJuly 2022September 2024Allow2600NoNo
29843684Slide SlipperJune 2022February 2025Allow3120NoNo
29800416FASTENERJuly 2021February 2025Allow4310NoNo

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 LEE, AMBER R - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner LEE, AMBER R works in Art Unit 2938 and has examined 34 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 23 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner LEE, AMBER R's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 100% 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 LEE, AMBER R receive 0.32 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by LEE, AMBER R is 23 months. This places the examiner in the 78% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LEE, AMBER R. This interview benefit is in the 12% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

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 100% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 4% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 30% 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 29.4% of allowed cases (in the 95% 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:

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.

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.