Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30003623 | TRUCK INTERIOR | May 2025 | December 2025 | Allow | 8 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29997618 | ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE | April 2025 | January 2026 | Allow | 9 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29989555 | DRONE | February 2025 | March 2026 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 29989554 | DRONE | February 2025 | March 2026 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29984590 | TOY AIRCRAFT | January 2025 | November 2025 | Allow | 10 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29980681 | Toy | December 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 11 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 35523601 | Drone | December 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 35524117 | Aircraft | November 2024 | October 2025 | Allow | 11 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29970824 | HYBRID AIRCRAFT WITH FOLDABLE TAIL AND WINGS | October 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 11 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29965640 | AIRCRAFT | September 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 29961785 | TOY | September 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29952816 | AIRCRAFT WITH FOLDABLE TAIL | July 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 14 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29950317 | LAUNCHER FOR TOY FIGURES | July 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 17 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29945663 | WHEEL STOP | June 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 29943824 | CENTRAL CONSOLE FOR AUTOMOBILE | May 2024 | December 2025 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 29942021 | AIRCRAFT | May 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29940993 | PROPELLER LAUNCHER | May 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 29939167 | Overhead Console for Vehicles | April 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 35523336 | Aircraft | December 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 29920426 | AIRCRAFT | December 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 29874056 | WINGED VEHICLE | April 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 29867953 | Aircraft | November 2022 | August 2025 | Allow | 33 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29846397 | VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LANDING (VTOL) VEHICLE | July 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 39 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 29832377 | AERIAL VEHICLE | March 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 29770372 | POD FOR AN ELECTRONIC VAPORIZER | February 2021 | October 2025 | Allow | 56 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 29658240 | DRONE | July 2018 | March 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 7 | 1 | 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 CASH, MARISSA J works in Art Unit 2961 and has examined 2 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 50.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 10000 months.
Examiner CASH, MARISSA J's allowance rate of 50.0% places them in the 12% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by CASH, MARISSA J receive 5.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 99% 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 CASH, MARISSA J is 10000 months. This places the examiner in the 0% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +100.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by CASH, MARISSA J. This interview benefit is in the 100% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.
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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 99% 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 32% 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 400.0% 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.
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.