Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18429705 | ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING RECOMMENDATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | February 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 19 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18418617 | SELECTIVE THREE-DIMENSIONAL LOCALIZATION AND NAVIGATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS | January 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18403486 | UNDERWATER ENVIRONMENT DETECTION DEVICE AND METHOD, FISHING ROD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | January 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18573970 | ONBOARD INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, AUTONOMOUS DRIVING SYSTEM, AND ONBOARD SYSTEM | December 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18068092 | MOBILE TERMINAL SYSTEM FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES | December 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12928806 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ESTIMATING BEHAVIORS OF VEHICLE USING GPS SIGNALS | December 2010 | December 2011 | Allow | 12 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12525101 | VEHICLE AND CONTROL METHOD OF THE SAME | July 2009 | March 2012 | Allow | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11889169 | WHEEL TRACTOR SCRAPER PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION | August 2007 | March 2012 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 2 | No | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner ALGAHAIM, HELAL A works in Art Unit 3666 and has examined 3 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 32 months.
Examiner ALGAHAIM, HELAL A'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.
On average, applications examined by ALGAHAIM, HELAL A receive 1.33 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 19% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ALGAHAIM, HELAL A is 32 months. This places the examiner in the 53% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 50% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.
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 33.3% of allowed cases (in the 100% 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.
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.