USPTO Examiner DYE ROBERT C - Art Unit 3619

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18960057PNEUMATIC TIRENovember 2024June 2025Allow700NoNo
18714198TIREMay 2024May 2025Allow1100NoNo
18706844TIREMay 2024June 2025Allow1310NoNo
18701776BI-DIRECTIONAL SIPE AND/OR SLOTApril 2024May 2025Allow1310NoNo
18572062PNEUMATIC VEHICLE TIREDecember 2023June 2025Allow1810NoNo
18377554WHEEL PARTITION ASSEMBLY CONFIGURED TO MODIFY TIRE CAVITY RESONANCEOctober 2023January 2025Allow1610NoNo
18547030RUN FLAT TIREAugust 2023April 2025Abandon2010NoNo
18269776TIREJune 2023December 2024Allow1710NoNo
18338396PNEUMATIC TIREJune 2023March 2025Allow2120NoNo
18255548TIREJune 2023April 2025Allow2220YesNo
18252369PNEUMATIC VEHICLE TYREMay 2023October 2024Allow1810NoNo
18252365Pneumatic Tire for AircraftMay 2023June 2025Abandon2520YesNo
18130069TIREApril 2023May 2025Allow2510NoNo
18109916TIREFebruary 2023December 2024Allow2210YesNo
18078266PNEUMATIC TIREDecember 2022October 2024Allow2210YesNo
18074041TIRE AND METHOD FOR USING THE SAMEDecember 2022December 2024Abandon2421NoNo
17967410HEAVY DUTY TIREOctober 2022November 2024Allow2510YesNo
17906614TREAD PROFILE OF A VEHICLE TYRESeptember 2022August 2024Allow2310NoNo
17757039TIREJune 2022November 2024Allow2910NoNo
17756777TIREJune 2022June 2024Allow2520NoNo
17781516TRUCK TIRE TREAD WITH J SHAPED SIPEJune 2022July 2024Allow2620NoNo
17780595TRUCK TIRE TREAD WITH DECOUPLING VOID AND ASSOCIATED DECOUPLING VOID SIPEMay 2022February 2024Allow2100NoNo
17780774TIREMay 2022April 2025Abandon3520NoNo
17756564PNEUMATIC TIREMay 2022July 2024Allow2610NoNo
17756286COMMERCIAL VEHICLE TIREMay 2022March 2025Allow3420NoNo
17777929A TREAD FOR IMPROVING SNOW PERFORMANCEMay 2022January 2025Abandon3220NoNo
17663745Higher traction, low-profile tires, for exotic/oversized wheels, DOT approved, and non-DOT approved for rear tiresMay 2022April 2024Abandon2310NoNo
17756055PNEUMATIC TIRE FOR A VEHICLEMay 2022September 2024Allow2820NoNo
17756017PNEUMATIC TIREMay 2022March 2025Allow3420NoNo
17775947TRUCK TIRE TREAD WITH DECOUPLING VOID AND ASSOCIATED DECOUPLING VOID SIPEMay 2022March 2024Allow2210NoNo
17771072TIRE HAVING AN IMPROVED TREADApril 2022November 2024Allow3011NoNo
17771091TIRE HAVING AN IMPROVED TREADApril 2022November 2024Allow3011NoNo
17713326PNEUMATIC TIREApril 2022July 2024Abandon2830YesNo
17656334Higher traction tires (DOT approved & non DOT approved slicks/radials for wheel sizes 24", 26", 28", with tire width ranging from 255 to 325, while specifically being a tire with side wall profile of 25 to 35. Front tires for oversized wheels that are classified as drag slicks & DOT drag radialsMarch 2022April 2024Abandon2410NoNo
17668022PNEUMATIC TIREFebruary 2022June 2024Allow2820YesNo
17597669WIRELESS POWER RECEPTION SYSTEM, TIRE/WHEEL ASSEMBLY, AND TIREJanuary 2022April 2025Allow3931NoNo
17577323Pneumatic TireJanuary 2022March 2024Allow2620NoNo
17548902PNEUMATIC TIREDecember 2021October 2024Abandon3420NoNo
17542745PNEUMATIC TIREDecember 2021December 2024Allow3630NoNo
17520215TIRENovember 2021March 2024Allow2910YesNo
17448587TIRESeptember 2021March 2024Allow3030NoNo
17386816PNEUMATIC TIREJuly 2021February 2024Allow3110NoNo
17294584PNEUMATIC TIREMay 2021April 2024Allow3520YesNo
17223720TIREApril 2021February 2024Allow3420YesNo
17279393STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR MARKING TIRESMarch 2021June 2024Abandon3921YesNo
17276666PNEUMATIC TIREMarch 2021January 2024Allow3420NoNo
17276395PNEUMATIC TIREMarch 2021September 2024Allow4240YesNo
17153818CAR TYREJanuary 2021February 2024Allow3720YesNo
17253210TIREDecember 2020July 2025Allow5440YesNo
17030041NON-PNEUMATIC TIRE INCLUDING FIBER PLATED USING METAL SALTSeptember 2020May 2024Allow4310NoNo
16982067PNEUMATIC VEHICLE TIRESeptember 2020March 2024Allow4240NoNo
16965982Pneumatic TireJuly 2020March 2025Allow5650NoNo
16965084Pneumatic TireJuly 2020October 2024Allow5060YesNo
16161629PNEUMATIC TIREOctober 2018April 2023Allow5440NoYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DYE, ROBERT C.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
14.3%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
6.5%
Lower than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

Filing a Notice of Appeal can sometimes lead to allowance even before the appeal is fully briefed or decided by the PTAB. This occurs when the examiner or their supervisor reconsiders the rejection during the mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) after the appeal is filed.

In this dataset, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner DYE, ROBERT C - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DYE, ROBERT C works in Art Unit 3619 and has examined 50 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 80.0%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 29 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DYE, ROBERT C's allowance rate of 80.0% places them in the 42% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by DYE, ROBERT C receive 1.94 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 62% 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 DYE, ROBERT C is 29 months. This places the examiner in the 48% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DYE, ROBERT C. 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 19.2% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 12% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 71.4% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 91% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 14% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.

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 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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 31% 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:

  • 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.