USPTO Examiner STOLTENBERG DAVID J - Art Unit 3626

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18438114DIGITAL ADVERTISING PLATFORM WITH DEMAND PATH OPTIMIZATIONFebruary 2024April 2024Allow200NoNo
18400824DIGITAL ADVERTISING PLATFORM WITH DEMAND PATH OPTIMIZATIONDecember 2023March 2024Allow310NoNo
18370473Systems and Methods for Activating Electronic Coupons Via Third-Party ServersSeptember 2023June 2024Allow800YesNo
18319712METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING ALERT MESSAGES RELATED TO SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONSMay 2023January 2024Allow800YesNo
18128637MACHINE LEARNING SYSTEM FOR PERSONALLY OPTIMIZED OFFER DECAY CURVESMarch 2023May 2024Allow1310NoNo
18109175DIGITAL ADVERTISING PLATFORM WITH DEMAND PATH OPTIMIZATIONFebruary 2023February 2024Allow1210NoNo
18168339METHOD AND SYSTEM OF FACILITATING A PURCHASE BETWEEN A BUYER AND A SELLERFebruary 2023August 2024Abandon1820NoNo
18075678SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INT9 QUANTIZATIONDecember 2022January 2024Allow1310NoNo
18060648FACILITATING CONSUMER PAYMENTS AND REDEMPTIONS OF DEAL OFFERSDecember 2022January 2024Allow1400NoNo
18073095SYSTEM, METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR LOCATION BASED DELIVERY OF DETERMINED PERTINENT DATADecember 2022April 2024Allow1600NoNo
17991145Method, System, and Computer Program Product for Applying Deep Learning Analysis to Financial Device UsageNovember 2022April 2024Allow1710NoNo
17933335DEVICES FOR HOME BASED ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGINGSeptember 2022May 2024Allow2030YesNo
17870904VERIFIED REVIEWS USING A CONTACTLESS CARDJuly 2022April 2024Allow2110YesNo
17867968AUTOMATIC AFTER CALL APPLICATION DOWNLOAD PLATFORMJuly 2022January 2024Allow1700YesNo
17806139SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LOCATION BASED DYNAMIC REDIRECTION OF ADVERTISER AFFILIATE LINKS FOR ONLINE ADVERTISINGJune 2022December 2023Allow1830NoNo
17727698MNEMONIC DEVICE AND A METHOD OF USE THEREOFApril 2022June 2024Allow2600NoNo
17657869CROSS-CHANNEL PERSONALIZED MARKETING OPTIMIZATIONApril 2022May 2024Allow2510YesNo
17711738ENTERPRISE CONTENT DELIVERY PLATFORM AND ARCHITECTUREApril 2022July 2024Abandon2810NoNo
17684649ON-LINE ADVERTISEMENT METHOD USING ADVERTISEMENT WEBSITEMarch 2022April 2024Allow2610NoNo
17679398SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LOCATION BASED DYNAMIC REDIRECTION OF ADVERTISER AFFILIATE LINKS FOR ONLINE ADVERTISINGFebruary 2022January 2024Allow2340NoNo
17580469METHOD FOR SELECTIVELY ADVERTISING ITEMS IN AN IMAGEJanuary 2022June 2024Allow2810YesNo
17647043TARGETED MARKETING BASED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INTERACTIONJanuary 2022November 2023Allow2240NoNo
17551413INFORMATION COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND INFORMATION COMMUNICATION METHODDecember 2021February 2024Allow2640YesNo
17548945ENABLING AN AUTOMATED ASSISTANT TO LEVERAGE ODOR SENSOR(S) OF CLIENT DEVICE(S)December 2021June 2024Allow3010YesNo
17547462METHOD FOR SELECTIVELY ADVERTISING ITEMS IN AN IMAGEDecember 2021April 2024Abandon2810NoNo
17546435METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA FOR DYNAMIC CONTENT ALLOCATIONDecember 2021March 2024Allow2720NoNo
17408268METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONDUCTING ECOMMERCE TRANSACTIONS IN MESSAGING VIA SEARCH, DISCUSSION AND AGENT PREDICTIONAugust 2021May 2024Allow3320NoNo
17375838TAXI MANAGEMENT DEVICE, TAXI OPERATION SYSTEM, AND FARE SETTING METHODJuly 2021February 2024Allow3130YesYes
17320097ATTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MOVING OUT-OF-HOME ADVERTISINGMay 2021April 2024Abandon3510NoNo
17243933SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FINDING EFFECTIVENESS OF GAMIFICATION FOR IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF A CONTACT CENTERApril 2021May 2024Allow3740YesNo
17168267METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SENDING BIOMETRIC DATA BASED INCENTIVESFebruary 2021January 2024Allow3650NoNo
17112719METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SECURE INFORMATION DISTRIBUTIONDecember 2020January 2024Allow3801NoNo
17066538METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MATCHING LOCATION-BASED CONTENTOctober 2020August 2024Abandon4630NoNo
16923001TRAINING A NEURAL NETWORK WITH QUANTIZED WEIGHTSJuly 2020January 2024Allow4210YesNo
16891989SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MITIGATING BIAS IN CLASSIFICATION SCORES GENERATED BY MACHINE LEARNING MODELSJune 2020January 2024Allow4420YesNo
16834271SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE-ASSISTED PREDICTION GENERATIONMarch 2020January 2024Allow4620YesNo
16680447SYSTEM AND METHOD TO UNIQUELY IDENTIFY A USER ACROSS INTERNET AND NON-INTERNET CHANNELSNovember 2019December 2021Abandon2520NoNo
16580563SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING INFORMATIONSeptember 2019January 2024Allow5230NoNo
15587594Segmented Advertising Database SystemMay 2017October 2022Abandon6040YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner STOLTENBERG, DAVID J.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
14.9%
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
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
7.0%
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 STOLTENBERG, DAVID J - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner STOLTENBERG, DAVID J works in Art Unit 3626 and has examined 38 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 81.6%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 26 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner STOLTENBERG, DAVID J's allowance rate of 81.6% places them in the 46% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by STOLTENBERG, DAVID J receive 1.74 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% 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 STOLTENBERG, DAVID J is 26 months. This places the examiner in the 63% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +19.4% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by STOLTENBERG, DAVID J. This interview benefit is in the 66% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 66% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 18.8% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 15% 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, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 15% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% 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, 44.4% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 49% 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 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:

  • 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.
  • Request pre-appeal conferences: PACs are highly effective with this examiner. Before filing a full appeal brief, request a PAC to potentially resolve issues without full PTAB review.

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.