Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18652208 | SCATTERING APERTURE IMAGING METHOD AND DEVICE, SYSTEM, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | May 2024 | August 2024 | Allow | 4 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18542448 | LOCATION DETERMINATION USING ANGLE-OF-ARRIVAL AND TIME-OF-FLIGHT | December 2023 | June 2024 | Allow | 6 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18533427 | LORENTZ CONSTRAINT ANGLE ESTIMATION METHOD AND SYSTEM IN NON-GAUSSIAN ENVIRONMENT | December 2023 | February 2024 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18060325 | MANEUVERABLE JAMMING GRID ARRAY AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | November 2022 | July 2024 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17945845 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR USING COMPUTER VISION TO GUIDE PROCESSING OF RECEIVE RESPONSES OF RADAR SENSORS OF A VEHICLE | September 2022 | November 2024 | Allow | 26 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17836065 | MULTIPLE FREQUENCY FUSION FOR ENHANCED POINT CLOUD FORMATION | June 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 27 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17730218 | RADAR SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PERFORMING DIRECTION OF ARRIVAL ESTIMATION IN A RADAR SYSTEM | April 2022 | July 2024 | Allow | 27 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17766923 | OBJECT DETECTION DEVICE | April 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17692915 | MOBILE DEVICE FOR DETECTING OBJECT AND OPERATION METHOD THEREFOR | March 2022 | November 2024 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17692615 | SENSOR SHIELD AND METHOD | March 2022 | November 2024 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17653463 | SIGNAL ISOLATION DEVICE | March 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17653436 | WALL SHAPE MEASUREMENT DEVICE | March 2022 | November 2024 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17584348 | TDM FMCW RADAR APPARATUS AND SIGNAL PROCESSING METHOD OF APPARATUS | January 2022 | November 2024 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17579956 | SENSOR FAUCET | January 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17627736 | RADAR DEVICE | January 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17570343 | FREQUENCY MODULATED CONTINUOUS WAVE RADAR DEVICE AND SIGNAL PROCESSING METHOD THEREOF | January 2022 | December 2024 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17297406 | RADAR SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFOR | December 2021 | December 2024 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17643609 | VEHICULAR EXTERIOR DOOR HANDLE ASSEMBLY WITH RADAR MODULE AND ENHANCED THERMAL MANAGEMENT | December 2021 | June 2024 | Allow | 30 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17535737 | AERIAL ANALYSIS OF GROUND SURFACE USING DISTANCE SENSOR OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE | November 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17612820 | SENSOR AND POSITION ESTIMATION METHOD | November 2021 | June 2024 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17392856 | 3D SCENE RECONSTRUCTION USING MULTI-STATIC CLUSTER RECEIVERS | August 2021 | October 2024 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17384449 | Methods and Systems for Predicting a Trajectory of an Object | July 2021 | June 2024 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17370285 | Methods and Systems For Radar Image Video Compression Using Per-Pixel Doppler Measurements | July 2021 | June 2024 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner SCHULTZ, DAVID CHRISTOPHER works in Art Unit 3648 and has examined 22 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 90.9%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 32 months.
Examiner SCHULTZ, DAVID CHRISTOPHER's allowance rate of 90.9% places them in the 73% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by SCHULTZ, DAVID CHRISTOPHER receive 1.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 13% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by SCHULTZ, DAVID CHRISTOPHER is 32 months. This places the examiner in the 33% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +14.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SCHULTZ, DAVID CHRISTOPHER. This interview benefit is in the 57% 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, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 70% 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.
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'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 34% 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.