Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18782673 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR INPUTTING AND OUTPUTTING SCHEDULE BASED ON NUMBER STRING FOR SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT | July 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18686098 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ANALYZING PATIENT LEAKAGE | February 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18544788 | FRICTIONLESS, SECURE METHOD TO DETERMINE DEVICES ARE AT THE SAME LOCATION | December 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18565821 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR HANDLING CONCRETE MIXER TRUCK HAVING RETURN CONCRETE | November 2023 | December 2025 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18523672 | Secure Communication Systems for Case Inventory | November 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18511985 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR A WORKFLOW TOLERANCE DESIGNER | November 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 26 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18367601 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR GENERATING A TIMETABLE | September 2023 | December 2025 | Abandon | 27 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18299046 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING A PROJECT WORKFLOW | April 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18099176 | CONSUMER TRANSACTION SYSTEM | January 2023 | March 2025 | Abandon | 26 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17955397 | WORK PROCEDURE SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USE | September 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17882838 | EVENT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT | August 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 35 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17736999 | SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR DATA COLLECTION ANALYSIS | May 2022 | January 2026 | Abandon | 44 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17706255 | Systems and Methods for Assessing the Marketability of a Product | March 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17668303 | PROJECT PULSE FEATURE, REQUIREMENT COMPLETION PULSE FEATURE, PROJECT OVERVIEW SYSTEM, PROJECT PLANNING SYSTEM, PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, TASK MANAGEMENT AND ENHANCED UNDERSTANDING AND OVERVIEW SYSTEM, AND METHODS OF USE | February 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17587372 | AUTOMATICALLY EXPANDING SEGMENTS OF USER EMBEDDINGS USING MULTIPLE USER EMBEDDING REPRESENTATION TYPES | January 2022 | February 2026 | Allow | 48 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17569638 | INTELLIGENT PARTICIPANT MATCHING AND ASSESSMENT ASSISTANT | January 2022 | October 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17546086 | ATTENDANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM | December 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17512196 | DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ELECTRONICALLY IMPLEMENTING CORRECTIVE ACTIONS BASED ON KEEP-SEPARATE ATTRIBUTES | October 2021 | June 2025 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17499899 | USER AVAILABILITY DETECTOR | October 2021 | January 2026 | Abandon | 51 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17492217 | ACTIONABLE VERIFIABLE MICRO-CROWD SOURCING | October 2021 | May 2023 | Abandon | 19 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17469950 | System And Method For Customer Premise Equipment (CPE) Theft of Service (TOS) Detection and Prevention | September 2021 | October 2025 | Allow | 49 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17466138 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AN AUTOMATED SELF-SERVICE SUPPORT DESK | September 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17412853 | PREDICTING AND MANAGING A COLLABORATION DELAY | August 2021 | July 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17422860 | LOG VISUALIZATION DEVICE, LOG VISUALIZATION METHOD, AND LOG VISUALIZATION PROGRAM | July 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17245559 | DETERMINING A RISK OF STUCK PIPES DURING WELL DRILLING OPERATIONS | April 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17218561 | CLASSIFICATION OF ORDERED DATA USING CUMULATIVE SUM ENCODING | March 2021 | August 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17207043 | DEVICE, METHOD AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR OPERATING A SHIP | March 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 48 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17164837 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING RISK RECOMMENDATION, MITIGATION AND PREDICTION | February 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17143801 | NORMALIZING PERFORMANCE DATA ACROSS INDUSTRIAL VEHICLES | January 2021 | September 2025 | Allow | 56 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17081346 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ANALYZING WORKER CONFORMANCE AND EFFICIENCY | October 2020 | September 2025 | Abandon | 59 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17026316 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DISTRIBUTING AN AGENT INTERACTION TO THE EVALUATOR BY UTILIZING HOLD FACTOR | September 2020 | January 2026 | Abandon | 60 | 8 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17002012 | SYSTEM FOR ADJUSTING RESOURCE ALLOCATION BASED ON USER SELECTION | August 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16986289 | AUTOMATIC GENERATION Of A TWO-PART READABLE SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORT (SAR) FROM HIGH-DIMENSIONAL DATA IN TABULAR FORM | August 2020 | September 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16947200 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ORTHOGONAL INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY DETERMINATION | July 2020 | September 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16918430 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING DENSE STAGING OF PICKUP ORDERS | July 2020 | December 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16764731 | Mining System | May 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 58 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16864511 | SYSTEM METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR A SOFTWARE APPLICATION TO COLLECT, ANALYZE AND DISTRIBUTE DATA FOR A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT ENVIRONMENT | May 2020 | August 2025 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16843018 | OBJECT MODEL FOR PRORATION CALCULATIONS | April 2020 | June 2025 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16722435 | AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT AND IMPLEMENT OPERATOR MONITORING APPARATUS, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS | December 2019 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16609027 | FRICTIONLESS, SECURE METHOD TO DETERMINE DEVICES ARE AT THE SAME LOCATION | October 2019 | September 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 16526050 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR REQUESTING SERVICE PROVIDERS IN REAL TIME | July 2019 | August 2022 | Abandon | 36 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 13437339 | DEADLOCK DETECTION FOR PARALLEL PROGRAMS | April 2012 | October 2013 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11745181 | METHOD AND APPARATUS TO AUTOMATICALLY RECOVER WELL GEOMETRY FROM LOW FREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNAL MEASUREMENTS | May 2007 | October 2013 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RINES, ROBERT D.
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.
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.
⚠ 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 RINES, ROBERT D works in Art Unit 3625 and has examined 27 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 33.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 51 months.
Examiner RINES, ROBERT D's allowance rate of 33.3% places them in the 5% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by RINES, ROBERT D receive 4.11 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 RINES, ROBERT D is 51 months. This places the examiner in the 4% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +16.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RINES, ROBERT D. This interview benefit is in the 58% 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, 10.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 5% 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 3.4% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 5% 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 request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 17% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 0.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 1% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 85.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 87% 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 3.7% of allowed cases (in the 82% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.
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.