USPTO Examiner ERSHOCK EVIN FRANKLIN GEO - Art Unit 2963

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
29999635Hair BrushApril 2025December 2025Allow800NoNo
29999068ELECTRIC TOOTHBRUSH REPLACEMENT HEADApril 2025December 2025Allow810NoNo
29999638Hair BrushApril 2025December 2025Allow800NoNo
29988619BRUSHFebruary 2025January 2026Allow1100NoNo
29987914Cosmetic BrushJanuary 2025December 2025Allow1000NoNo
29986807CLEANING BRUSHJanuary 2025September 2025Allow800NoNo
35523650Cosmetic brushDecember 2024November 2025Allow1100NoNo
29978537HairbrushDecember 2024December 2025Allow1200NoNo
29974343Bath BrushNovember 2024October 2025Allow1100NoNo
29974339Bath BrushNovember 2024October 2025Allow1000NoNo
29969500EYELID BRUSHOctober 2024December 2025Allow1400NoNo
35522523Hair brushSeptember 2024October 2025Allow1300NoNo
35522359BrushSeptember 2024January 2026Allow1610NoNo
35522604Mucosal brushJune 2024February 2026Abandon2001NoNo
29942641ELECTRIC CLEANING BRUSHMay 2024October 2025Allow1700NoNo
29938296Heated BrushApril 2024November 2025Allow1900NoNo
29935641BRUSH HEAD OF AN ORAL CARE IMPLEMENTApril 2024November 2025Allow1900YesNo
29930585Hair Straightening BrushMarch 2024November 2025Allow2010YesNo
29908136Interdental BrushJanuary 2024November 2025Allow2200NoNo
29923669ROTARY POOL AND SPA BRUSHDecember 2023December 2025Allow2410YesNo
29903884Hand ScrubberSeptember 2023July 2025Allow2200NoNo
29880907ELECTRIC TOOTHBRUSH BODYJuly 2023October 2025Allow2720NoNo
29782450Dispenser for CosmeticsMay 2021May 2023Allow2500NoNo

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 ERSHOCK, EVIN FRANKLIN GEO - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ERSHOCK, EVIN FRANKLIN GEO works in Art Unit 2963 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 25 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner ERSHOCK, EVIN FRANKLIN GEO's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 99% 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 ERSHOCK, EVIN FRANKLIN GEO receive 0.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 0% 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 ERSHOCK, EVIN FRANKLIN GEO is 25 months. This places the examiner in the 81% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

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 5% 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 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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 35% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions less often than average. Allowances may come directly without a separate action for formal matters.

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.