USPTO Examiner NELESKI ELIZABETH ROSE - Art Unit 3658

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19193588MOBILE ROBOT, CONTROLLER, AND LOCALIZATION METHOD FOR MOBILE ROBOTApril 2025August 2025Allow300NoNo
18897430GUIDE DOG ROBOT FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED PERSONS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFSeptember 2024February 2026Allow1700NoNo
18780356SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATED FRAMING CONSTRUCTIONJuly 2024March 2026Abandon2030NoNo
18416283TRAINING ARTIFICIAL NETWORKS FOR ROBOTIC PICKINGJanuary 2024August 2025Allow1900NoNo
18381511NAVIGATION DIRECTIONS WITH A FAMILIAR LOCATION AS AN INTERMEDIATE DESTINATIONOctober 2023September 2025Abandon2310NoNo
18447689METHOD AND COMPUTING SYSTEM FOR OBJECT REGISTRATION BASED ON IMAGE CLASSIFICATIONAugust 2023July 2025Abandon2310NoNo
18352787AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE HAVING A THERMAL INFRARED CAMERA WITH REPLACEABLE FILTERJuly 2023March 2025Allow2010YesNo
18328886METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONTROL USING HAND TRACKINGJune 2023March 2025Allow2220YesNo
18318328ROBOT AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THEREOFMay 2023January 2026Allow3210YesNo
18188104ROBOT AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFORMarch 2023August 2025Allow2910YesNo
18170128REMOTE MANEUVERING SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE AND ASSOCIATED METHODFebruary 2023January 2025Allow2310NoNo
17919023CONTROL APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD AND PROGRAMOctober 2022August 2025Abandon3420NoNo
17917557SPACE INFORMATION RECORDER, DANGER ANALYSIS SYSTEM, DANGER ANALYSIS METHOD, MEGA-CONSTELLATION BUSINESS DEVICE, SSA BUSINESS DEVICE, ROCKET LAUNCH BUSINESS DEVICE, SATELLITE BUSINESS DEVICE, DEBRIS REMOVAL BUSINESS DEVICE, ORBITAL TRANSFER BUSINESS DEVICE, AND OADROctober 2022March 2025Allow2910NoNo
17878532TRAVELING LANE RECOGNITION APPARATUS AND TRAVELING LANE RECOGNITION METHODAugust 2022August 2025Abandon3620NoNo
17878530PARKING METHOD, APPARATUS AND SYSTEMAugust 2022March 2026Allow4330NoNo
17793954LOOP CLOSURE DETECTION METHOD AND SYSTEM, MULTI-SENSOR FUSION SLAM SYSTEM, ROBOT, AND MEDIUMJuly 2022January 2026Abandon4220NoNo
17825084VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD AND DEVICE, COMPUTER STORAGE MEDIUM, AND VEHICLEMay 2022February 2025Allow3320NoNo
17733704METHOD FOR PERFORMING ROTATIONAL SPEED SYNCHRONISATIONApril 2022November 2025Allow4220NoNo
17726077LEANING-VEHICLE-DATA-OUTPUT APPARATUSApril 2022March 2026Abandon4730NoNo
17725717POSITION-SENSITIVE CONTROLLER FOR AIRCRAFT SEATINGApril 2022October 2025Allow4220NoNo
17768544DISPLAY CONTROL SYSTEM, WORK MACHINE, AND DISPLAY CONTROL METHODApril 2022March 2025Abandon3520NoNo
17700849REAR END COLLISION PROBABILITY CALCULATIONMarch 2022March 2025Allow3630YesNo
17625842INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUMJanuary 2022November 2024Allow3410NoNo
17567477AUTOMATED VALET PARKING SYSTEM, CONTROL METHOD OF AUTOMATED VALET PARKING SYSTEM, AND AUTONOMOUS DRIVING VEHICLEJanuary 2022March 2025Allow3930YesNo
17541490ROAD SEGMENT SELECTION ALONG A ROUTE TO BE TRAVELLED BY A VEHICLEDecember 2021July 2025Abandon4340NoNo
17595712Electrically Driven Hydraulic Work MachineNovember 2021June 2025Allow4220NoNo
17490043DIGITAL TWIN BASED BINAURAL AUDIO ECHOLOCATIONSeptember 2021November 2024Allow3740YesNo
17474454ANOMALY DETECTION IN LATENT SPACE REPRESENTATIONS OF ROBOT MOVEMENTSSeptember 2021June 2025Allow4520NoNo
17438295Explicit Signage Visibility Cues in Driving NavigationSeptember 2021May 2025Allow4450YesNo
17471520TECHNIQUES FOR FORCE AND TORQUE-GUIDED ROBOTIC ASSEMBLYSeptember 2021March 2025Allow4230YesNo
17446310INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTAugust 2021June 2025Allow4520YesNo
17400241MOTION PLANNING AND TASK EXECUTION USING POTENTIAL OCCUPANCY ENVELOPESAugust 2021May 2025Allow4540YesNo
17395785LOCAL SENSING BASED AUTONOMOUS NAVIGATION, AND ASSOCIATED SYSTEMS AND METHODSAugust 2021August 2024Allow3630NoNo
17395584DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR COMMUNICATION WITH EQUIPMENT SUCH AS AUTOMATIC SWIMMING POOL CLEANERSAugust 2021January 2025Allow4120NoNo
17427861METHODS FOR IMPROVING ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEMS AND DEVICES THEREOFAugust 2021March 2026Allow5650NoNo
17417213POSITIONING AUTONOMOUS VEHICLESJune 2021January 2025Abandon4240YesNo
17217474AUTONOMOUS AND SAFE INTEGRATION OF HUMAN TASK IN ROBOTIC OPERATIONMarch 2021July 2024Allow4030YesNo
17185072HANDLING SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHODFebruary 2021August 2024Allow4230YesNo
17154692METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR IDENTIFYING AND HARVESTING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTSJanuary 2021April 2025Abandon5120NoNo
17113565ROBOT TEACHING DEVICE INCLUDING ICON PROGRAMMING FUNCTIONDecember 2020September 2024Allow4520YesNo
17089332OPTIMIZING CALIBRATION WITH CONSTRAINTS BETWEEN DIFFERENT COORDINATE FRAMESNovember 2020December 2024Allow4930YesNo
17011428FRAMEWORK OF ROBOTIC ONLINE MOTION PLANNINGSeptember 2020September 2024Allow4931YesNo
16932067VISION-BASED TELEOPERATION OF DEXTEROUS ROBOTIC SYSTEMJuly 2020June 2025Allow5950YesNo
16900685SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DERIVING PATH-PRIOR DATA USING COLLECTED TRAJECTORIESJune 2020May 2025Allow5930YesNo

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 NELESKI, ELIZABETH ROSE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner NELESKI, ELIZABETH ROSE works in Art Unit 3658 and has examined 20 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 85.0%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 45 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner NELESKI, ELIZABETH ROSE's allowance rate of 85.0% places them in the 61% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by NELESKI, ELIZABETH ROSE receive 3.20 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 90% 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 NELESKI, ELIZABETH ROSE is 45 months. This places the examiner in the 13% 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 +20.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by NELESKI, ELIZABETH ROSE. This interview benefit is in the 65% 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, 36.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 83% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 6.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 6% 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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 37% 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 40% 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:

  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • 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.