Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17120150 | GENERATING SEQUENCES OF NETWORK NODES | December 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17118076 | CRITICALITY DETECTION FOR AUTOMATION RISK MITIGATION | December 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17108978 | SYSTEM FOR ON-DEMAND ADVERTISING | December 2020 | May 2025 | Abandon | 53 | 8 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17085486 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF GENERATING AND TRANSFORMING DATA SETS FOR ENTITY COMPARISON | October 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17073282 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ENABLING AN INTERACTION OF A USER WITH ONE OR MORE ADVERTISEMENTS WITHIN A PODCAST | October 2020 | September 2022 | Abandon | 23 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16803120 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RETURN ON INVESTMENT IMPACT REPORTING | February 2020 | November 2024 | Abandon | 56 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15972642 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MACHINE LEARNING BASED GENERATION OF MEDIA STRUCTURED PRODUCTS | May 2018 | March 2025 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15277398 | AUGMENTED REALITY GAMING FOR PHYSICAL GOODS | September 2016 | January 2020 | Allow | 40 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14501264 | ENHANCED SHARED MEDIA EXPERIENCES | September 2014 | July 2019 | Allow | 57 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14492438 | Contextual Inference of Non-Verbal Expressions | September 2014 | August 2019 | Allow | 59 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 14485528 | Determining a Prompt for Performing an Action Presented to a User in Association with Video Data | September 2014 | June 2019 | Allow | 57 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13671375 | Asynchronous Account Modification | November 2012 | February 2016 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 1 | Yes | 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 ANSARI, AZAM A works in Art Unit 3621 and has examined 12 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 66.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 55 months.
Examiner ANSARI, AZAM A's allowance rate of 66.7% places them in the 29% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by ANSARI, AZAM A receive 4.75 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 98% 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 ANSARI, AZAM A is 55 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +20.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ANSARI, AZAM A. This interview benefit is in the 62% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 16.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 16% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 14.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 17% 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.
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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 37% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions less often than average. Allowances may come directly without a separate action for formal matters.
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.