USPTO Examiner EL CHANTI KARMA AHMAD - Art Unit 3627

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17126307PERSONAL COMMUNICATION DRONESDecember 2020October 2023Abandon3420NoNo
17112823SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATING JOB RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ONE OR MORE CANDIDATESDecember 2020April 2024Abandon4010NoNo
17247078METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ENABLING USERS TO COLLABORATE AND CREATE ONLINE MULTI-MEDIA STORYNovember 2020January 2023Allow2620YesNo
17092147GROUP IDENTIFICATION USING MACHINE LEARNINGNovember 2020September 2024Abandon4740YesNo
17087894FORECASTING BASED ON PLANNING DATANovember 2020March 2023Allow2920YesNo
16983868SYSTEM AND ASSOCIATED METHODS FOR APPORTIONMENT OF INVENTORY BETWEEN WAREHOUSE NODES TO ACHIEVE REQUESTED SERVICE LEVELSAugust 2020June 2023Allow3430YesNo
16920368Current Health Status CertificationJuly 2020August 2024Abandon4920NoNo
16854481SALE SYSTEM AND CONTROLLING METHOD THEREOFApril 2020September 2023Abandon4131YesNo
16438751SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE OF MEDIA ANALYSISJune 2019June 2023Allow4911YesNo
16437074Machine Learning-Enabled Event Tree for Rapid and Accurate Customer Problem ResolutionJune 2019December 2023Abandon5421YesNo
15904193KNOWLEDGE-GRAPH-DRIVEN RECOMMENDATION OF CAREER PATH TRANSITIONSFebruary 2018February 2023Abandon6010NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner EL-CHANTI, KARMA AHMAD - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner EL-CHANTI, KARMA AHMAD works in Art Unit 3627 and has examined 11 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 36.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner EL-CHANTI, KARMA AHMAD's allowance rate of 36.4% places them in the 7% 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 EL-CHANTI, KARMA AHMAD receive 2.09 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 52% 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 EL-CHANTI, KARMA AHMAD is 41 months. This places the examiner in the 22% 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 +57.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by EL-CHANTI, KARMA AHMAD. This interview benefit is in the 95% 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, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 42% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 52% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.

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 6% 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 33% 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 38% 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.
  • 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 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.