USPTO Examiner DYER ANDREW R - Art Unit 3662

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
16953037DEEP DOCUMENT PROCESSING WITH SELF-SUPERVISED LEARNINGNovember 2020August 2023Allow3310YesNo
17028851LIVE STREAMING SHOPPING EXPERIENCESeptember 2020July 2023Allow3350YesNo
17023721Method and Apparatus for Constructing Document Heading Tree, Electronic Device and Storage MediumSeptember 2020October 2023Abandon3740YesNo
17019211COMPONENT LEVEL DATA MANAGEMENT AND STATE CHANGE DETECTION IN WEB APPLICATIONS FOR DATA LOSS PROTECTIONSeptember 2020May 2023Allow3250YesNo
16977999CARGO HANDLING VEHICLE FOR NAVIGATION IN NARROW AISLES AND METHOD THEREFORESeptember 2020November 2024Allow5130YesNo
16984918SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR COMMUNICATION ACROSS MULTIPLE BROWSER PAGES FOR AN APPLICATIONAugust 2020June 2023Allow3470YesNo
16876534DOCUMENT AUTHORING PLATFORMMay 2020April 2023Allow3440NoNo
16753505SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DOCUMENT AUTOMATIONApril 2020October 2023Abandon4231NoNo
16734173ELECTRONIC MESSAGE USER INTERFACEJanuary 2020April 2023Allow3970YesNo
16730097Creating and Performing Transforms for Indexed Data on a Continuous BasisDecember 2019October 2023Abandon4670YesNo
16686621Automatic API Document Generation From SCIM MetadataNovember 2019August 2023Allow4540YesNo
16661074SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SEMANTICALLY DETECTING SYNTHETIC DRIVEN CONVERSATIONS IN ELECTRONIC MEDIA MESSAGESOctober 2019June 2023Allow4330YesNo
16587800MANAGING ACCESS TO SENSITIVE DATA IN TRANSCRIPTIONSSeptember 2019October 2024Allow6040YesYes
16561629EMOJI PREDICTION AND VISUAL SENTIMENT ANALYSISSeptember 2019August 2024Abandon6051YesYes
16511055SEARCH-QUERY REDIRECTIONJuly 2019November 2023Abandon5260NoNo
16509573INPUT DEVICE, MOBILE TERMINAL, INPUT DEVICE CONTROL METHOD, AND INPUT DEVICE CONTROL PROGRAMJuly 2019September 2023Abandon5060YesNo
16441072Detaching Social Media Content Creation from PublicationJune 2019January 2024Abandon5640YesYes
16222026Systems, Methods, and Computer-Readable Storage Media for Designing, Creating, and Deploying Composite Machine Learning Applications in Cloud EnvironmentsDecember 2018January 2024Abandon6040YesNo
16133308STATE PREDICTION OF DEVICESSeptember 2018August 2023Allow5952YesNo
16024310PREDICTING A FUTURE BEHAVIOR BY APPLYING A PREDICTIVE MODEL TO EMBEDDINGS REPRESENTING PAST BEHAVIORS AND THE FUTURE BEHAVIORJune 2018December 2023Abandon6040NoNo
15890159LAYOUT DETECTION FOR BIDIRECTIONAL TEXT DOCUMENTS HAVING HEBREW TEXTFebruary 2018September 2021Allow4370NoYes
15863807SYSTEM AND METHOD OF PROOFING EMAIL CONTENTJanuary 2018December 2018Allow1111YesNo
15839982ANALYZING DOMAIN FEATURES USING NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSINGDecember 2017October 2023Abandon6020NoYes
15187394PRESENTING COLLABORATION SUMMARIES OF ARTIFACTS TO IMPROVE ENGAGEMENT OF USER IN COLLABORATION ACTIVITIESJune 2016February 2018Allow2010YesNo
14694035RESPONSIVE IMAGE RENDITION AUTHORINGApril 2015March 2017Allow2310NoNo
14479447RESPONSIVE IMAGE RENDITION AUTHORINGSeptember 2014March 2017Allow3010NoNo
14338233Method and System for Adding Dynamic Labels to a File and Encrypting the FileJuly 2014February 2017Allow3010NoNo
14011198Display of Hypertext Documents Grouped According to Their AffinityAugust 2013December 2015Allow2810YesNo
13974904WEB PAGE ASSOCIATED WITH A NODE IN A WEBSITE TRAFFIC PATTERNAugust 2013March 2016Allow3110YesNo
13959318FACILITATING ACCESS TO DATA IN NETWORK PAGE GENERATION CODEAugust 2013October 2015Allow2700NoNo
13784668PERSISTING THE STATE OF VISUAL CONTROL ELEMENTS IN UNIFORM RESOURCE LOCATOR (URL)-GENERATED WEB PAGESMarch 2013February 2016Allow3520YesNo
13686114INFORMATION BROWSING APPARATUS AND RECORDING MEDIUM FOR COMPUTER TO READ, STORING COMPUTER PROGRAMNovember 2012February 2017Allow5150YesNo
13667899INTERFACE AND METHOD FOR EXPLORING A COLLECTION OF DATANovember 2012February 2016Allow3920YesNo
13612015SYSTEM TO VIEW AND MANIPULATE ARTIFACTS AT A TEMPORAL REFERENCE POINTSeptember 2012December 2015Allow3970YesNo
13533190Non-Hierarchical Multi-Hash Table Model for Menu Data RepresentationJune 2012September 2014Allow2700NoNo
13530467REAL ESTATE CONTENT TRACKING ON THE INTERNETJune 2012September 2015Allow3930NoNo
13501370METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DOCUMENT PRESENTATION AND ANALYSISApril 2012January 2014Allow2100NoNo
13407648Automatic Detection and Manipulation of Calls to Action in Web PagesFebruary 2012June 2014Allow2720YesNo
13369955SYSTEM TO VIEW AND MANIPULATE ARTIFACTS AT A TEMPORAL REFERENCE POINTFebruary 2012January 2016Allow4770YesNo
13348088FACILITATING ACCESS TO DATA IN NETWORK PAGE GENERATION CODEJanuary 2012March 2013Allow1400NoNo
13294803PROGRESS INDICATION FOR A DIGITAL WORKNovember 2011March 2014Allow2830YesNo
13278899REPRESENTING EXTENSIBLE MARKUP LANGUAGE (XML) AS AN EXECUTABLE HAVING CONDITIONAL AUTHENTICATION OR POLICY LOGICOctober 2011April 2014Allow3030YesNo
13253883Proofreading Device, Method for Proofreading Document, and Computer Readable Recording Medium Storing Proofreading Control ProgramOctober 2011January 2013Allow1500NoNo
13200849Transmitting and Receiving data via Barcodes through a cellphone for privacy and anonymityOctober 2011December 2013Allow2621YesNo
13136610SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR A WEB BROWSER FOR USE IN HANDHELD WIRELESS DEVICES THAT RENDERS WEB PAGES WITHOUT ADVERTISEMENTAugust 2011June 2018Abandon60121YesYes
13186340PROTECTING CONTENT PRESENTED IN A WEB BROWSERJuly 2011November 2013Allow2720YesNo
13184128SYSTEM TO FORECAST PERFORMANCE OF ONLINE NEWS ARTICLES TO SUGGEST THE OPTIMAL HOMEPAGE LAYOUT TO MAXIMIZE ARTICLE READERSHIP AND READERS STICKINESSJuly 2011March 2013Allow2010NoNo
13161715INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD THEREOF FOR GENERATING DRAWING DATA OF A MOVING IMAGE OBJECT IN A RASTER FORMAT FOR PRINTING AN IMAGE BASED ON A WEB PAGE BY A PRINTING APPARATUS IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT THE WEB PAGE CONTAINS THE MOVING IMAGE OBJECT AND DRAWING DATA OF THE MOVING IMAGE OBJECT CANNOT BE CREATED IN THE VECTOR FORMATJune 2011May 2014Allow3530NoNo
13106064CONCURRENT PARSING AND PROCESSING OF HTML AND JAVASCRIPT0May 2011October 2012Allow1710NoNo
13022870WORD INPUT METHODFebruary 2011May 2014Allow4000NoNo
12890444DISPLAYING A PREVIEW OF DOCUMENT DATA INCLUDING A REGION IN WHICH AN OBJECT IS INSERTEDSeptember 2010October 2012Allow2510NoNo
12827538REUSING STYLE SHEET ASSETSJune 2010October 2012Allow2730YesNo
12439886ADD-IN PROGRAM FOR UPLOAD, AUXILIARY PROGRAM FOR UPLOAD AND UPLOAD METHODJune 2010October 2014Allow6060YesNo
12822684User selecting control component of application programJune 2010July 2024Abandon60110YesYes
12793236EXTENDABLE META-DATA SUPPORT IN FINAL FORM PRESENTATION DATASTREAM PRINT ENTERPRISESJune 2010July 2014Allow5040NoNo
12749618TRADEMARK REPORT WITH STORE LAYOUT DIAGRAMMarch 2010July 2013Allow3920YesNo
12576567METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR VALIDATION OF STRUCTURED DOCUMENTSOctober 2009February 2013Allow4030YesNo
12566851RESOLVING INTER-PAGE NODES AND CONNECTORS IN PROCESS DIAGRAMSSeptember 2009August 2012Allow3400NoNo
12196723METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REPURPOSING FORMATTED CONTENTAugust 2008July 2011Allow3400NoNo
12092249INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHODApril 2008May 2012Allow4820NoNo
12062024SGML DOCUMENT VALIDATION USING XML-BASED TECHNOLOGIESApril 2008September 2011Allow4110NoNo
12061502ADAPTIVE PARSING OF SPARSE XML DATAApril 2008March 2016Allow6040YesYes
11951519METHODS FOR DEFORMING MAP WIDGETS ON THE BROWSERDecember 2007December 2012Allow6040YesNo
11949917EDITING APPARATUS AND EDITING METHODDecember 2007December 2012Allow6030NoNo
11892114CALENDAR PRODUCTION APPARATUSAugust 2007September 2010Allow3700NoNo
11781447INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, ITS CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAMJuly 2007October 2012Allow6030NoNo
11799457AUTOMATIC SWITCHING FONTS ON MULTILINGUAL TEXT RUNSMay 2007August 2011Allow5120YesNo
11686794MANAGING LIST TAILORING FOR A MOBILE DEVICEMarch 2007November 2012Allow6040NoNo
11685685OBJECT ANNOTATIONMarch 2007September 2014Allow6090YesNo
11672166SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATIC STYLESHEET INFERENCEFebruary 2007July 2013Allow6050NoNo
11700563METHOD OF DETERMINING THE PROJECTED AREA OF A 2-D VIEW OF A COMPONENTJanuary 2007April 2010Allow3810NoNo
11566145TARGET ADVERTISEMENT IN A BROADCAST SYSTEMDecember 2006September 2013Allow6070YesNo
11563965INTERACTIVE MULTIMEDIA DIARYNovember 2006June 2014Allow6040NoYes
11600349REPRESENTING EXTENSIBLE MARKUP LANGUAGE (XML) AS AN EXECUTABLE HAVING CONDITIONAL AUTHENTICATION OR POLICY LOGICNovember 2006July 2011Allow5640NoYes
11600567METHOD FOR GENERATING PRESENTATION ORIENTED XML SCHEMAS THROUGH A GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACENovember 2006January 2010Allow3810NoNo
11599947VERSATILE PAGE NUMBER DETECTORNovember 2006June 2010Allow4320NoYes
11598909COLLABORATIVE EDITING OF A DOCUMENTNovember 2006July 2011Allow5660YesNo
11598835DIGITAL CONTENT CREATION SYSTEM, DIGITAL CONTENT CREATION METHOD, AND PROGRAM PRODUCTNovember 2006November 2009Allow3610NoNo
11598083SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONVERTING LEGACY AND PROPRIETARY DOCUMENTS INTO EXTENDED MARK-UP LANGUAGE FORMATNovember 2006February 2010Allow3920NoNo
11539445CONTENT COMPILATION AND PUBLISHING SYSTEMOctober 2006November 2012Allow6070YesNo
11533058METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CUSTOMIZING THE DISPLAY OF MULTIDIMENSIONAL DATASeptember 2006February 2010Allow4010YesNo
11371810PROCESSING OF USER CHARACTER INPUTS HAVING WHITESPACEMarch 2006February 2011Allow5940NoNo
11357285APPLYING EFFECTS TO A MERGED TEXT PATHFebruary 2006April 2010Allow5020YesNo
11355294ELECTRONIC MUSICAL APPARATUS FOR DISPLAYING CHARACTERFebruary 2006October 2010Allow5620YesNo
11351065DETECTION OF LISTS IN VECTOR GRAPHICS DOCUMENTSFebruary 2006March 2010Allow4920NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DYER, ANDREW R.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
12
Examiner Affirmed
6
(50.0%)
Examiner Reversed
6
(50.0%)
Reversal Percentile
77.6%
Higher than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
23
Allowed After Appeal Filing
6
(26.1%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
17
(73.9%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
38.8%
Lower than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

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, 26.1% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is below the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal has limited effectiveness in prompting favorable reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

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 shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner DYER, ANDREW R - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DYER, ANDREW R works in Art Unit 3662 and has examined 85 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 85.9%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 40 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DYER, ANDREW R's allowance rate of 85.9% places them in the 64% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by DYER, ANDREW R receive 3.24 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 88% 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 DYER, ANDREW R is 40 months. This places the examiner in the 25% 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 -7.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DYER, ANDREW R. This interview benefit is in the 5% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 21.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 29% 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 10.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 12% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 33.3% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 35% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show below-average success with this examiner. Consider whether your arguments are strong enough to warrant a PAC request.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 45.5% of appeals filed. This is in the 12% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 20.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 57.1% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 57% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 10.6% of allowed cases (in the 94% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.

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.

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.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.