USPTO Examiner ALMADHRHI WESAM NMN - Art Unit 3666

Examiner ALMADHRHI, WESAM NMN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ALMADHRHI, WESAM NMN works in Art Unit 3666 and has examined 36 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 75.0%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 34 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner ALMADHRHI, WESAM NMN's allowance rate of 75.0% places them in the 32% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by ALMADHRHI, WESAM NMN receive 2.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 65% 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 ALMADHRHI, WESAM NMN is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 24% 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 +33.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ALMADHRHI, WESAM NMN. This interview benefit is in the 84% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 66% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 53.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 61% 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 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 35% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions less often than average. Allowances may come directly without a separate action for formal matters.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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