Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14641245 | TARGET-SEEKING CONTROL METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MOBILE ROBOTS | March 2015 | December 2016 | Allow | 21 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 14602519 | METHOD FOR CALIBRATING AN ARTICULATED END EFFECTOR EMPLOYING A REMOTE DIGITAL CAMERA | January 2015 | October 2016 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14161990 | ROBOT CONTROL METHOD, ROBOT CONTROL DEVICE, ROBOT, AND ROBOT SYSTEM | January 2014 | April 2015 | Allow | 14 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14086124 | MOTION CONTROL DEVICE FOR VEHICLE | November 2013 | August 2014 | Allow | 8 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13696633 | FORCE CONTROL ROBOT | November 2012 | April 2015 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13582671 | Method and System for Assisting in the Handling of Robotized Machines in a Congested Environment | September 2012 | August 2014 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13629390 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING EFFICIENT ROBOT-BASE POSITION | September 2012 | February 2015 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13628256 | ESTIMATING APPARATUS, ESTIMATING METHOD, AND COMPUTER PRODUCT | September 2012 | November 2014 | Allow | 26 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13544173 | Ground Location of Work Truck | July 2012 | December 2014 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13467547 | ROBOT HAND AND ROBOT | May 2012 | July 2014 | Allow | 26 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13402900 | TECHNIQUE FOR PROVIDING MULTIPLE UNDO AND REDO OPERATIONS FOR FLIGHT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS | February 2012 | September 2014 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13391709 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING THE CONTACT POINT FOR A CLUTCH IN A VEHICLE | February 2012 | June 2014 | Allow | 28 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13257397 | FUEL CONSUMPTION SAVING CONTROL DEVICE FOR WORK VEHICLE AND FUEL CONSUMPTION SAVING METHOD FOR WORK VEHICLE | September 2011 | January 2014 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13231793 | Ground Location of Work Truck | September 2011 | July 2014 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13227792 | PRESSURE REGULATION METHOD FOR AN AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION | September 2011 | January 2015 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13227191 | AIRCRAFT DISPLAY SYSTEMS AND METHODS WITH FLIGHT PLAN DEVIATION SYMBOLOGY | September 2011 | March 2015 | Allow | 42 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13227095 | Fuel-Saving Path Planning Navigation System and Fuel-Saving Path Planning Method Thereof | September 2011 | March 2014 | Allow | 31 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 13140123 | METHOD FOR ALLOWING A MANIPULATOR TO COVER A PREDETERMINED TRAJECTORY, AND CONTROL DEVICE FOR CARRYING OUT SAID METHOD | June 2011 | February 2014 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13160597 | REJECTION OF UNDER-HOOD AIRFLOW | June 2011 | May 2014 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13057697 | METHOD OF RELEASING THE BRAKES OF A MOTOR VEHICLE FITTED WITH AN ASSISTANCE DEVICE FOR STARTING ON A SLOPE, SUCH AN ASSISTANCE DEVICE, AND MOTOR VEHICLE COMPRISING IT | May 2011 | July 2013 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13126895 | TIRE BURST DETECTING AND ANTI-DEVIATION SYSTEM AND METHOD THEREOF | April 2011 | July 2013 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 13089493 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NAVIGATION IN A GPS-DENIED ENVIRONMENT | April 2011 | April 2013 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12990958 | ELECTRIC POWER STEERING CONTROL APPARATUS | November 2010 | June 2013 | Allow | 31 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 12850191 | MOTION CONTROL DEVICE FOR VEHICLE | August 2010 | September 2013 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 12747251 | SAFETY CONCEPT FOR AN INTELLIGENT ACTUATOR | August 2010 | January 2013 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12662527 | Apparatus and method detecting a robot slip | April 2010 | September 2013 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12738092 | VEHICLE TRAVEL CONTROL DEVICE | April 2010 | July 2013 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 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 MOTT, ADAM R works in Art Unit 3657 and has examined 27 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 29 months.
Examiner MOTT, ADAM R's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 99% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by MOTT, ADAM R receive 1.11 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 10% 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 MOTT, ADAM R is 29 months. This places the examiner in the 65% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MOTT, ADAM R. This interview benefit is in the 18% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 38.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 88% 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 77% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 35% 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 41% 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.