USPTO Examiner PEKO BRITTANY RENEE - Art Unit 3665

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19002590METHOD FOR PLACE RE-RECOGNITION OF MOBILE ROBOT BASED ON LIDAR ESTIMABLE POSEDecember 2024March 2026Allow1500NoNo
18887216HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLESeptember 2024January 2026Allow1600NoNo
18716392METHOD FOR CLASSIFYING THE MANOEUVRES PERFORMED BY AN AIRCRAFT BY SEGMENTATION OF TIME SERIES OF MEASUREMENTS ACQUIRED DURING A FLIGHT OF THE AIRCRAFTJune 2024March 2026Allow2210NoNo
18658093INTELLIGENT SETTINGS OF ONBOARD SENSORS ON A VEHICLEMay 2024December 2025Allow1910YesNo
18705345DATA COLLECTION FOR VEHICLE SENSOR DATAApril 2024January 2026Allow2110YesNo
18612053AUTOMATIC DRIVING CONTROL APPARATUS AND METHOD THEREOFMarch 2024March 2026Allow2410NoNo
18593983BATTERY ELECTRIC VEHICLEMarch 2024November 2025Allow2110NoNo
18426669INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODJanuary 2024November 2025Allow2110NoNo
18508993AIRCRAFT ENGINE STARTER HAVING AN INTEGRATED DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEMNovember 2023March 2026Allow2810YesNo
18491230VEHICLE CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR AUTOMATED VEHICLE PLATOON DRIVINGOctober 2023December 2025Allow2610NoNo
18546844METHOD FOR ASSISTIVE OR AUTOMATED VEHICLE CONTROLAugust 2023January 2026Abandon2910NoNo
18450572MOBILE UNIT MANAGEMENT DEVICE, MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUMAugust 2023November 2025Allow2710NoNo
18222426APPARATUS FOR DRIVER ASSISTANCE AND METHOD FOR DRIVER ASSISTANCEJuly 2023October 2025Allow2810NoNo
18222384PREDICTION OF ROAD GRADE FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE NAVIGATIONJuly 2023September 2025Allow2620YesNo
18270549CONTROL DEVICE AND CONTROL METHODJune 2023December 2025Abandon3010NoNo
18343839SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF DETECTING FLUID RELEASEJune 2023February 2026Allow3220YesNo
18335457ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS SENSOR RING NETWORKJune 2023March 2026Abandon3320YesNo
18193119SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING INTERSECTIONS AND CONTROLLING VEHICLES AT INTERSECTIONSMarch 2023January 2026Allow3420NoNo
18183040YIELD PREDICTION MODEL TO COMPUTE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TRAJECTORIESMarch 2023February 2026Abandon3530NoNo
18041882METHOD FOR ADJUSTING THE SPEED OF A VEHICLEFebruary 2023November 2025Allow3330YesNo
18097478DRIVING MODIFICATION TO DECREASE CARBONJanuary 2023October 2025Allow3330NoNo
18154252HARVESTER IMPLEMENT WITH AUTOMATED OPERATING MODE INITIALIZATIONJanuary 2023January 2026Allow3610NoNo
18053073METHOD, APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR SENSOR DATA ANALYSISNovember 2022November 2025Allow3630NoNo
17908926Object Location Information Provisioning for Autonomous Vehicle ManeuveringSeptember 2022December 2025Abandon3920NoNo
17874923SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SPRINKLER HEAD DETECTIONJuly 2022September 2025Allow3810NoNo
17811957BATTERY TEMPERATURE CONTROL APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLESJuly 2022November 2025Allow4010NoNo
16963198Work Vehicle with Antenna Devices for Autonomous TravelJuly 2020October 2025Allow6040NoYes
16390723AUTOMATIC TILTING VEHICLEApril 2019May 2021Allow2510NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PEKO, BRITTANY RENEE.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
9.4%
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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner PEKO, BRITTANY RENEE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner PEKO, BRITTANY RENEE works in Art Unit 3665 and has examined 2 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 10000 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner PEKO, BRITTANY RENEE'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.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by PEKO, BRITTANY RENEE receive 2.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 73% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by PEKO, BRITTANY RENEE is 10000 months. This places the examiner in the 1% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 100% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 38% 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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • 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.