USPTO Examiner LAGHLAM SARA - Art Unit 3614

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18289515JACKING POINT STRUCTUREJune 2024January 2025Allow1410NoNo
17918059Expeditious, Hygienic Drive Through Mobile Meal Service Methods and SystemsOctober 2022November 2024Allow2520YesNo
17798991MODULAR STORAGE DEVICE FOR A VEHICLE CABAugust 2022November 2024Allow2710NoNo
17881706AIR GUIDE DEVICE FOR A MOTOR VEHICLEAugust 2022December 2024Allow2900NoNo
17873974Vehicle Body for VehicleJuly 2022January 2025Allow3010NoNo
17867048TRIM ELEMENT FOR A VEHICLE ELEMENTJuly 2022November 2024Allow2810NoNo
17857283RETROFIT TAILGATE LATCHING MECHANISM AND METHODJuly 2022December 2024Allow2910NoNo
17854582CONNECTOR FOR CONNECTING A WINDSHIELD AND AN INTRUSION BAR TO A ROLL CAGE OF AN OFF-ROAD VEHICLEJune 2022September 2024Allow2700NoNo
17790452MOTOR VEHICLE HAVING A MEANS FOR RELEASING THE FRONT WHEEL IN THE EVENT OF FRONTAL IMPACTJune 2022December 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17853873VEHICLE SUNVISOR ASSEMBLYJune 2022October 2024Allow2810NoNo
17785453DUAL FUNCTION LATCH ASSEMBLY FOR DUAL DOOR PILLAR-LESS DOOR SYSTEM AND CONTROL SYSTEM FOR CONTROLLING THE LATCH ASSEMBLYJune 2022September 2024Allow2701NoNo
17782674ACTIVE AERODYNAMIC VEHICLE SURFACE WITH FORCE SENSORJune 2022November 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17767981Body for an Electrically Operable Motor VehicleApril 2022October 2024Allow3020NoNo
17586300DOOR HINGE DEVICE FOR VEHICLESJanuary 2022October 2024Allow3210NoNo
17577646RUN CHANNEL WITH ADHESIVE WEAR TAPEJanuary 2022September 2024Allow3210YesNo
17572639Mat connector structureJanuary 2022November 2024Abandon3510NoNo
17567329TORSION ASSIST SYSTEM FOR A FOLDING SEAT BACK IN A VEHICLEJanuary 2022September 2024Allow3210YesNo
17541624TOWING CAP AND BUMPER COVER OF VEHICLE HAVING SAMEDecember 2021October 2024Allow3520NoNo
17606696SHOCK ABSORBING APPARATUSOctober 2021August 2024Allow3410NoNo
17274994MOTOR VEHICLE HAVING A LEAF ELEMENT AND AN ADJUSTING DEVICE FOR MOVING THE LEAF ELEMENT, AND ADJUSTING DEVICE FOR MOVING A LEAF ELEMENT OF A MOTOR VEHICLEMarch 2021October 2024Abandon4330YesNo
17260315CAB AND WORK MACHINEJanuary 2021November 2024Abandon4630YesNo

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 LAGHLAM, SARA - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner LAGHLAM, SARA works in Art Unit 3614 and has examined 4 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 43 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner LAGHLAM, SARA'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.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by LAGHLAM, SARA receive 2.25 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 63% 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 LAGHLAM, SARA is 43 months. This places the examiner in the 17% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a -100.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LAGHLAM, SARA. This interview benefit is in the 0% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 2% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 33% 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:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.