Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16755891 | REAL-TIME DRIVING RISK ASSESSMENT METHOD EMPLOYING EQUIVALENT FORCE AND DEVICE THEREOF | October 2021 | March 2025 | Allow | 59 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17139440 | Systems and Methods for Compressing and Storing Sensor Data Collected by an Autonomous Vehicle | December 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 45 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17125479 | VEHICLE TO VEHICLE (V2V) RETURN TO LAST FILL POINT | December 2020 | October 2024 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16949275 | VELOCITY ESTIMATION AND OBJECT TRACKING FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE APPLICATIONS | October 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17049922 | WASTE SORTING GANTRY ROBOT | October 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 46 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17049171 | DRIVER PROFILING AND IDENTIFICATION | October 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17018202 | METHOD FOR DRIVING A MOTOR VEHICLE IN AT LEAST PARTIALLY AUTOMATED FASHION | September 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16835214 | DRIVER DAZZLE MITIGATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | March 2020 | June 2025 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16824939 | CONTROL SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD FOR PATH ASSIGNMENT OF TRAFFIC OBJECTS | March 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 56 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16778157 | Device for Modifying Lateral Control of a Vehicle | January 2020 | November 2024 | Abandon | 58 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16730105 | High Bandwidth And Low Latency Hybrid Communication Techniques For A Navigation System | December 2019 | June 2024 | Allow | 54 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16659117 | ENHANCED VEHICLE ACTIVATION | October 2019 | June 2025 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16477349 | THREE-DIMENSIONAL SCANNING USING FIXED PLANAR DISTANCE SENSORS | July 2019 | September 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RAMIREZ, ELLIS B.
With a 50.0% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.
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, 50.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
✓ Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner RAMIREZ, ELLIS B works in Art Unit 3658 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 84.6%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 54 months.
Examiner RAMIREZ, ELLIS B's allowance rate of 84.6% places them in the 61% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by RAMIREZ, ELLIS B receive 3.15 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 87% 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by RAMIREZ, ELLIS B is 54 months. This places the examiner in the 4% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -2.4% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RAMIREZ, ELLIS B. This interview benefit is in the 9% 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, 26.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 48% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 16.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 20% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 18% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 20% percentile among all examiners. 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.
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'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.