USPTO Examiner RIVERA GONZALEZ IVONNEMARY - Art Unit 3626

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18416663GUARDIAN INFORMATION-BASED ANIMAL INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SERVER AND ANIMAL INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT METHOD THEREOFJanuary 2024April 2025Abandon1510NoNo
18457985Spot Date AppAugust 2023October 2024Abandon1420NoNo
18263640INFORMED CONSENSUS DETERMINATION AMONG MULTIPLE DIVERGENT USER OPINIONSJuly 2023June 2025Abandon2220YesYes
18317868METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTHENTICATION OF IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS FOR DETECTING POTENTIAL VARIATIONS IN REAL-TIMEMay 2023January 2025Abandon2010NoNo
18142737VERIFIER-BUILT PROFILES FOR DATING APPLICATIONMay 2023June 2025Abandon2640YesNo
18136269LOCATION-BASED SOCIAL APPLICATIONApril 2023June 2025Abandon2540YesNo
18297279SOCIAL MEDIA SCORING SCHEMA CONNECTED TO CRYPTOGRAPHIC OBJECT SUBSET SELECTIONApril 2023June 2025Abandon2640YesNo
18098448SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CREATING AND TRANSMITTING AN INCENTIVIZED OR MANDATED SERIOUS GAME SAFETY TEST TO OCCUPANTS OR USERS OF LIABLE PROPERTY IN AN ORGANIZATIONJanuary 2023June 2025Abandon2830YesNo
18092067SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DIGITAL IMPRESSION AND MEMORIALIZATIONDecember 2022October 2024Abandon2120NoNo
17948483REFERRAL SYSTEM AND METHODSeptember 2022February 2025Abandon3710NoNo
17785776A SYSTEM TO ACHIEVE DIGITAL IMMORTALITYJune 2022March 2025Abandon3310NoNo
17704100METHOD OF PROVING OWNERSHIP AND OWNERSHIP TRANSFER HISTORY USING DECENTRALIZED IDMarch 2022April 2025Abandon3620NoNo
17761159APPARATUS FOR CHECKING LEGISLATION ON CHEMICALS, AND METHOD THEREFORMarch 2022December 2024Abandon3320NoNo
17692829SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ONLINE SOCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL NETWORKINGMarch 2022January 2025Abandon3520NoNo
17522768SKILL DATA MANAGEMENTNovember 2021June 2025Abandon4340NoNo
17511466STANDARDIZING GLOBAL ENTITY JOB DESCRIPTIONSOctober 2021September 2024Allow3440YesNo
17469689Configuring A Software Service For Processing Time DataSeptember 2021November 2024Abandon3830YesNo
17469666Software Service For Processing Time DataSeptember 2021October 2024Abandon3720NoNo
17385761SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO GENERATE SUBSCRIPTION RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON CLASSIFICATION OF CONTENT CREATORSJuly 2021February 2025Abandon4350YesNo
17357637COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREPARING COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTATIONJune 2021May 2025Abandon4650YesNo
17292680DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR COORDINATED EVACUATION OF A PLURALITY OF BUILDINGSMay 2021May 2025Abandon4840YesNo
17122067Anti-Money Laundering Blockchain TechnologyDecember 2020January 2025Abandon4930YesYes
17107994SOCIAL NETWORKING CONVERSATION PARTICIPANTSDecember 2020March 2025Abandon5160YesNo
16953884Computer Platform Implementing Many-to-Many Job MarketplaceNovember 2020December 2024Abandon4840YesNo
16776138AUTOMATICALLY DETERMINING THE QUALITY OF ATTRIBUTE VALUES FOR ITEMS IN AN ITEM CATALOGJanuary 2020January 2025Abandon5960YesNo
16742780INTELLIGENT REPORT WRITERJanuary 2020March 2025Abandon6070YesNo
16593000MEDICAL PRODUCT CONSISTENCY VERIFICATIONOctober 2019June 2025Abandon6040YesYes
16549142SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ANALYZING CUSTOMER FEEDBACKAugust 2019February 2025Abandon6060YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
14.8%
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
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
6.9%
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 RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY works in Art Unit 3626 and has examined 27 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 3.7%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY's allowance rate of 3.7% places them in the 0% 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 RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY receive 3.44 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 99% 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 RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 15% 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 +5.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RIVERA GONZALEZ, IVONNEMARY. This interview benefit is in the 32% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 2.1% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 0% 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 1% 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, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 15% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

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.

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 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 32% 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.
  • 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.