USPTO Examiner SNIDER SCOTT - Art Unit 3621

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
16436963System and Method Including a Distributed Ledger Data Structure for Authenticating and Clearing CouponsJune 2019February 2025Allow6070YesNo
15973478Mobile Device Operating System for Providing Enhanced Communications Via Segmented Message TemplatesMay 2018May 2021Abandon3630YesYes
15782569GEOPARTITIONED DATA CACHINGOctober 2017May 2019Allow1930YesNo
15337954SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING A PERSONALIZED PREPAID CARDOctober 2016November 2019Abandon3710NoNo
15337770NAVIGATION SYSTEM WITH DYNAMIC GEOFENCE MARKETPLACE MECHANISM AND METHOD OF OPERATION THEREOFOctober 2016October 2020Abandon4720YesNo
15336527SYSTEM, METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR GENERATING CONTEXT-AWARE GAME APPLICATION COMPONENT ADVERTISINGOctober 2016March 2020Abandon4060YesNo
15259047METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING A GAMIFIED TRUSTEE BASED SOCIAL AUTHENTICATION TO RECOVER AN ACCOUNT OF A USERSeptember 2016November 2019Abandon3820NoNo
15210859INTEGRATED MOBILE DEVICE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMJuly 2016August 2019Abandon3710NoNo
15207954COMPUTER PLATFORM FOR MANAGING THIRD PARTY INTERACTIONS AND GENERATING ANALYTICS THEREFOREJuly 2016July 2019Abandon3610NoNo
15206966SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AN ATTENTION-BASED FRAMEWORK FOR CLICK THROUGH RATE (CTR) ESTIMATION BETWEEN QUERY AND BIDWORDSJuly 2016August 2020Abandon4930NoNo
15183819DISCOVERING AND INTERACTING WITH PROXIMATE AUTOMOBILESJune 2016October 2019Allow4020YesNo
15183446METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AWARD IDENTIFICATION BASED ON TRANSACTIONAL BEHAVIOR AND INTERESTSJune 2016January 2020Abandon4330YesNo
15183620Travel Booking with Automatic Consumption of Loyalty Reward PointsJune 2016December 2019Abandon4230YesNo
15182286Website Content PreserverJune 2016January 2019Abandon3110NoNo
15181312CUSTOMIZED MARKETING WITH MICRO AND NANO GRANULARITYJune 2016December 2019Allow4220YesNo
15034473SHADOW ADVERTISEMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD, CONTROLLED IN LINKAGE WITH SMARTPHONEMay 2016February 2019Abandon3310NoNo
15074872Server-Side Automated Shopping List Management, Intelligent Coupon Generation and Coupon-Influenced Product SelectionMarch 2016December 2018Abandon3310NoNo
15074895Client-Side Automated Shopping List Management, Intelligent Coupon Generation and Coupon-Influenced Product SelectionMarch 2016December 2018Abandon3310NoNo
15056576GENERATION APPARATUS, GENERATION METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUMFebruary 2016November 2019Abandon4420YesNo
14985330SYSTEM FOR CREATING AND DISTRIBUTING INTERACTIVE ADVERTISEMENTS TO MOBILE DEVICESDecember 2015October 2018Abandon3320YesNo
14985334SYSTEM FOR CREATING AND DISTRIBUTING INTERACTIVE ADVERTISEMENTS TO MOBILE DEVICESDecember 2015November 2018Abandon3520YesNo
14961965SELECTING AN ELECTRONIC PAYMENT ACCOUNT TO MAXIMIZE REWARDSDecember 2015October 2019Abandon4630YesNo
14961971SELECTING AN ELECTRONIC PAYMENT ACCOUNT TO MAXIMIZE REWARDSDecember 2015October 2019Abandon4640YesNo
14949463Advertising Workflow to Increase Click-Through RatesNovember 2015October 2020Abandon5840YesNo
14852444APPARATUSES, METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR A HEALTH/WELLNESS ADVERTISING, FINANCING AND MANAGEMENT PLATFORMSeptember 2015July 2018Abandon3410NoNo
14839607SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CURATING AND DISPLAYING SOCIAL MEDIA CONTENT AND RELATED ADVERTISEMENTS ON DISPLAY DEVICES AT LIVE EVENTSAugust 2015June 2018Abandon3410YesNo
14700238MOBILE DEVICE USER INTERFACE WITH DYNAMIC ADVERTISING CONTROL INTERFACE AREA FOR INCENTIVIZING USER VIEWING OF ADVERTISEMENTSApril 2015April 2018Abandon3510NoNo
14685919COST-PER-VIEW ADVERTISEMENT BIDDINGApril 2015July 2020Abandon6080NoNo
14662817LOCATION DIRECTED OFFERSMarch 2015February 2019Abandon4730YesNo
14618533GEOFENCED EVENT-BASED FAN NETWORKING: SPACE-TIME DEPENDENCEFebruary 2015April 2018Abandon3810NoNo
14485584ENGAGEMENT MODE MARKETPLACE WITH ADJUSTED PRICING BASED ON ENGAGEMENT PERFORMANCESeptember 2014July 2018Abandon4620NoNo
14485565ENGAGEMENT MODE MARKETPLACE WITH ENHANCED BIDDINGSeptember 2014July 2020Abandon6040YesYes
14322313SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENABLING ACCESS TO DIGITAL CONTENT BASED ON GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS VISITED BY MOBILE DEVICE USERSJuly 2014October 2019Allow6060YesYes
14289382Providing an Altered Shopping Experience in Retail EnvironmentsMay 2014January 2018Abandon4410NoNo
14276718HARNESSING LARGE DATA SOURCES TO DEFINE A MOBILE USER'S REAL-TIME CONTEXT THEN DETERMINING AND DELIVERING HIGHLY RELEVANT MOBILE MESSAGES BASED ON THAT CONTEXTMay 2014March 2018Abandon4620NoNo
14211059PUSH NOTIFICATIONS FOR LOCATION-BASED CONTENT DELIVERYMarch 2014January 2019Abandon5860YesNo
14169970Product Information by Consumer MovementJanuary 2014December 2018Abandon5940YesNo
14169631Product Information by Consumer MovementJanuary 2014February 2020Abandon6060YesNo
14071775METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED DETECTION OF CAN-SPAM VIOLATIONS BY MERCHANTS AND ACQUIRERSNovember 2013January 2019Abandon6070YesNo
14066260PRODUCT INFORMATION BY CONSUMER MOVEMENTOctober 2013March 2019Abandon6040YesNo
14041971METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DEFINING TARGETED GEOGRAPHIC ZONES FOR DELIVERING ELECTRONIC CONTENTSeptember 2013November 2019Abandon6060YesNo
14030773SELECTION AND COMMUNICATION OF A PRODUCT PROMOTIONSeptember 2013October 2019Abandon6060YesNo
13916922DYNAMIC BLOCKING OF TARGETED ADVERTISEMENTS BASED ON USER EVENT OCCURRENCESJune 2013February 2018Abandon5620YesNo
13907757METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SELECTING ADVERTISEMENTS TO MINIMIZE AD FATIGUEMay 2013October 2019Allow6040YesNo
13887138HYBRID STREAMED CONTENT AND USER-OWNED CONTENT PRESENTATIONMay 2013February 2018Abandon5840NoNo
13886642INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM HAVING STORED THEREIN PROGRAM, SERVER, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODMay 2013January 2020Abandon6080YesNo
13869678SYSTEM FOR CREATING AND DISTRIBUTNG INTERACTIVE ADVERTISEMENTS TO MOBILE DEVICESApril 2013May 2020Allow6051YesYes
13800832MOBILE MESSAGING ECOSYSTEM - CONTENT MESSAGE LAYERMarch 2013June 2018Abandon6040YesYes
13801247LOCATION-BASED CONTENT DELIVERYMarch 2013January 2019Abandon6080YesNo
13801564Social Content SynchronizationMarch 2013October 2018Abandon6040YesYes
13724793CONTEXTUAL CONTENT TARGETINGDecember 2012March 2018Abandon6060YesNo
13715856GENERATING DYNAMICALLY CUSTOMIZED USER-SPECIFIC ADVERTISEMENTSDecember 2012October 2018Allow6020YesYes
13715934GENERATING CUSTOMIZED ADVERTISEMENTS WITH UNDISCLOSED ADVERTISER AND PUBLISHER CONTENTDecember 2012October 2018Allow6020YesYes
13715925GENERATING CUSTOMIZED ADVERTISEMENTS WITH UNDISCLOSED ADVERTISER CONTENTDecember 2012October 2018Allow6020YesYes
13715481TECHNIQUES FOR USING A HEAT MAP OF A RETAIL LOCATION TO PROMOTE THE SALE OF PRODUCTSDecember 2012January 2018Abandon6060YesNo
13712790DISTRIBUTED ADVERTISEMENT INSERTION IN CONTENT-CENTRIC NETWORKSDecember 2012May 2019Allow6050YesYes
13712551Client-Side Advertising DecisionsDecember 2012October 2018Abandon60100YesNo
13474695SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RECOMMENDING A GRAMMAR FOR A MESSAGE CAMPAIGN USED BY A MESSAGE OPTIMIZATION SYSTEMMay 2012April 2019Allow6060YesYes
13449172LOCATION-BASED WISH LISTApril 2012May 2019Abandon6080NoNo
13355347LOCATION-BASED APPLICATION POP UPJanuary 2012June 2020Abandon6060YesYes
13290915CONTEXTUAL AD STORIESNovember 2011August 2018Abandon6070NoNo
13197440FUEL DISPENSER APPLICATION FRAMEWORKAugust 2011May 2019Abandon6050NoYes
12789735KEYWORD ANALYSIS USING SOCIAL MEDIA DATAMay 2010June 2014Allow48100YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner SNIDER, SCOTT.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
8
Examiner Affirmed
4
(50.0%)
Examiner Reversed
4
(50.0%)
Reversal Percentile
76.8%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 50.0% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
17
Allowed After Appeal Filing
7
(41.2%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
10
(58.8%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
68.6%
Higher 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, 41.2% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner SNIDER, SCOTT - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner SNIDER, SCOTT works in Art Unit 3621 and has examined 63 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 20.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 56 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner SNIDER, SCOTT's allowance rate of 20.6% places them in the 3% 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 SNIDER, SCOTT receive 3.86 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 95% 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by SNIDER, SCOTT is 56 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.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +30.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SNIDER, SCOTT. This interview benefit is in the 77% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 6.2% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 3% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 3% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 66.7% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 57% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 20% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 12.5% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 46% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

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 37% 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.
  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.
  • 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.