Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17117571 | LANDING ASSISTANCE SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AN AIRCRAFT UPON TOTAL FAILURE OF THE ENGINES OF THE AIRCRAFT | December 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17116725 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING AN INITIAL ORBIT OF SATELLITES POST DEPLOYMENT | December 2020 | June 2023 | Abandon | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17115109 | HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLE AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAME | December 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 40 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17099911 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING CONTROLLER-PILOT REJECTION RATIOS | November 2020 | April 2023 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17056390 | APPARATUS, METHOD AND SYSTEM RELATING TO AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS | November 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 43 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17098624 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS THAT OPTIMIZE SPEED BRAKE OPERATIONS | November 2020 | December 2023 | Abandon | 37 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17083778 | MIXED ASPECT GRAPHIC FOR NEIGHBORING FIELDS OF VIEW | October 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 45 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 17082728 | METHOD AND SYSTEM TO ABSTRACT DATA FROM AN AVIONICS DEVICE | October 2020 | June 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17062742 | DISPLAY SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING GROUND TRAFFIC COLLISON THREAT AWARENESS | October 2020 | July 2023 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17061060 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VISUALIZING AN ASSUMED LATERAL AND VERTICAL FLIGHT PATH ON AN AVIONIC DISPLAY | October 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17041647 | ELECTRONIC CONTROL DEVICE | September 2020 | March 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17032290 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING A DESCENT PROFILE | September 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 52 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17030972 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING LOCALIZATION OF A VEHICLE ON A ROAD | September 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 17030919 | TASK SCHEDULING METHOD, APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM | September 2020 | August 2023 | Abandon | 35 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17028036 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISPLAYING TERMINAL AREA PROCEDURE CHARTS | September 2020 | April 2024 | Allow | 43 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17023306 | METHOD OF ASSISTING A MOTOR VEHICLE | September 2020 | June 2023 | Abandon | 33 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17016791 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD | September 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 46 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17011360 | Drift-Based Rendezvous Control | September 2020 | July 2023 | Allow | 34 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16976870 | SYSTEMS AND METHOD FOR COLLISION AVOIDANCE BETWEEN AIRCRAFT OR SHIPS | August 2020 | November 2023 | Allow | 39 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16999490 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS USING IMAGE PROCESSING TO DETERMINE AT LEAST ONE KINEMATIC STATE OF A VEHICLE | August 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16969444 | VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE AND VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD | August 2020 | March 2023 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16990405 | DRIVING ASSISTANCE DEVICE | August 2020 | January 2023 | Abandon | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16938530 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING SOURCE-AGNOSTIC TRAJECTORIES | July 2020 | March 2024 | Allow | 44 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16917002 | VEHICLE AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAME | June 2020 | December 2022 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16957613 | TRAFFIC-FLOW CONTROL DEVICE AND DATA STRUCTURE OF TRAVELING SCENARIO | June 2020 | October 2023 | Abandon | 40 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16884349 | TERRAIN AWARENESS AND WARNING (TAW) SYSTEMS AND METHODS ADAPTED FOR AN URBAN AIR MOBILITY VEHICLE (UAMV) | May 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 47 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16764133 | SADDLED VEHICLE | May 2020 | June 2023 | Abandon | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16760756 | VEHICLE BRAKE DEVICE | April 2020 | April 2024 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16757603 | CONTROL OF DIVERSE TYPES OF CREW INTERFACE FOR FLIGHT CONTROL | April 2020 | November 2023 | Allow | 43 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16756549 | RAILWAY AUTOMATION NETWORK AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING MESSAGES IN A RAILWAY AUTOMATION NETWORK | April 2020 | March 2024 | Allow | 47 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16831289 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISTRIBUTED DATA ACQUISITION | March 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 54 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16649631 | ELECTRICAL DEVICE FOR CONNECTION TO A HIGH-VOLTAGE SUPPLY SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR DETECTING A FAULT OF A COMPONENT OF THE ELECTRICAL DEVICE | March 2020 | December 2023 | Abandon | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16807617 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ASSISTING A MANEUVER OF A MOVING OBJECT | March 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 47 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16800470 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RENDERING DYNAMIC DATA AND CONTROLLING THE VISUAL FORM OF THE DATA ON A COCKPIT DISPLAY WITHOUT ALTERING THE CERTIFIED SOFTWARE | February 2020 | March 2024 | Abandon | 49 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16793514 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATICALLY UPDATING A CURRENT FLIGHT PLAN OF AN AIRCRAFT | February 2020 | October 2023 | Abandon | 44 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16637835 | SENSOR-CONTROLLED ADJUSTMENT OF ODOMETRIC MEASUREMENT PARAMETERS TO WEATHER CONDITIONS | February 2020 | September 2024 | Abandon | 56 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16783159 | ALTERNATING BRAKING METHOD FOR SMOOTH STOPPING FROM ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL | February 2020 | June 2024 | Abandon | 53 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16775382 | DETERMINATION OF VEHICLE COLLISION POTENTIAL BASED ON INTERSECTION SCENE | January 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16775084 | Systems and Methods for Adjusting the Orbit of a Payload | January 2020 | July 2022 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16738773 | AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE CONTROL WITH WHEEL DEPTH WATER CAPACITIVE FENDER MOLDING | January 2020 | August 2023 | Abandon | 43 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16734055 | Tracking Neighboring Quasi-Satellite Orbits Around Mars's Moon Phobos | January 2020 | March 2023 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16722116 | VEHICLE CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD | December 2019 | May 2024 | Allow | 53 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16703565 | UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD AND UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE | December 2019 | October 2022 | Abandon | 35 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16687946 | MODULAR TRAIN SYSTEM | November 2019 | February 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16601425 | Trusted Train Derailment Avoidance Control System and Method | October 2019 | June 2023 | Abandon | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16497848 | ON VEHICLE COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM LEAK DETECTION | September 2019 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16580214 | MODULAR TRAIN SYSTEM | September 2019 | March 2024 | Abandon | 54 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16563900 | Providing Navigable Environment Plots | September 2019 | May 2022 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16550610 | EMERGENCY BRAKING DEVICE FOR VEHICLE | August 2019 | August 2024 | Abandon | 59 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16522010 | VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE | July 2019 | July 2023 | Abandon | 48 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16474696 | COMFORT-BASED SELF-DRIVING PLANNING METHOD | June 2019 | July 2022 | Allow | 37 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16450034 | SYSTEM, VEHICLE AND METHOD FOR ADAPTING A DRIVING CONDITION OF A VEHICLE UPON DETECTING AN EVENT IN AN ENVIRONMENT OF THE VEHICLE | June 2019 | July 2022 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16466269 | STATE MONITORING DEVICE OF RAILCAR | June 2019 | August 2023 | Abandon | 50 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16402033 | METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING STICKING OF LUBRICATION CONTROL VALVE OF HYBRID VEHICLE | May 2019 | December 2022 | Abandon | 43 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner SILVA, MICHAEL THOMAS.
With a 100.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. 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 SILVA, MICHAEL THOMAS works in Art Unit 3663 and has examined 54 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 29.6%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 43 months.
Examiner SILVA, MICHAEL THOMAS's allowance rate of 29.6% places them in the 5% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by SILVA, MICHAEL THOMAS receive 3.52 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 92% 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 SILVA, MICHAEL THOMAS is 43 months. This places the examiner in the 17% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +13.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SILVA, MICHAEL THOMAS. This interview benefit is in the 51% 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, 10.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 6% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 8.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 9% 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, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 51% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 50.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 36% 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.