USPTO Examiner ANTONUCCI ANNE MARIE - Art Unit 3666

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17111299METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR RISK DETERMINATION OF A ROUTEDecember 2020September 2021Allow920YesNo
17094493SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PREDICTING A ROAD OBJECT ASSOCIATED WITH A ROAD ZONENovember 2020March 2024Abandon4020NoNo
17042089METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS (ADAS) FEATURESSeptember 2020April 2024Abandon4220NoNo
16920126ANNOTATING HIGH DEFINITION MAP DATA WITH SEMANTIC LABELSJuly 2020April 2024Abandon4510NoNo
16918280FOLLOWING MOBILE PLATFORM AND METHOD THEREOFJuly 2020August 2022Abandon2620NoNo
16889182Systems and Methods for Managing Space at a Location for Receiving AssetsJune 2020August 2021Allow1520YesNo
16869040COST CALCULATION SYSTEM AND METHODMay 2020February 2022Abandon2110NoNo
16834459AUTONOMOUS DRIVING SIMULATIONS BASED ON VIRTUAL SIMULATION LOG DATAMarch 2020March 2022Allow2410YesNo
16752242AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE ROUTING WITH LOCAL AND GENERAL ROUTESJanuary 2020April 2022Allow2710YesNo
16739440VEHICLE PATH CONTROLJanuary 2020October 2021Allow2110YesNo
16738451SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING AND MANAGING ELECTRICITYJanuary 2020March 2022Abandon2720NoNo
16702122VEHICLE, AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAMEDecember 2019October 2021Allow2210NoNo
16690111COURSE CORRECTION METHOD AND DEVICE, AND AIRCRAFTNovember 2019May 2022Abandon2910NoNo
16686276DRIVING ASSIST DEVICE, DRIVING ASSIST METHOD, AND DRIVING ASSIST PROGRAMNovember 2019August 2022Abandon3320NoNo
16665509INDOOR MAPPING WITH INERTIAL TRACKINGOctober 2019September 2021Allow2310YesNo
16601051VEHICLE CUSTOMIZATION AND PERSONALIZATION ACTIVITIESOctober 2019September 2021Allow2320YesNo
16593920DRIVING MODE AND PATH DETERMINATION METHOD AND SYSTEM OF AUTONOMOUS VEHICLEOctober 2019February 2022Abandon2810NoNo
16489980METHOD OF IDENTIFYING DRIVING SPACE USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, AND LEARNING MODULE AND ROBOT IMPLEMENTING SAMEAugust 2019September 2022Abandon3620NoNo
16458078AUTOMATIC DETECTION OF DATA FOR ANNOTATION FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE PERCEPTIONJune 2019August 2021Allow2610YesNo
16458005AUTOMATIC DETECTION OF DATA FOR ANNOTATION FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE PERCEPTIONJune 2019August 2021Allow2610YesNo
16437235MOVER CONTROL SYSTEM, MOVER SYSTEM, MOVER CONTROL METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUMJune 2019September 2021Allow2710NoNo
16420561ROBUST DIGITAL CONTROLLER FOR SKID-STEER MACHINEMay 2019September 2021Allow2810NoNo
16356118METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AIDING IN THE PILOTING OF AN AIRCRAFTMarch 2019July 2021Allow2810NoNo
16356567LANDING GEAR TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICMarch 2019July 2021Allow2810YesNo
16299285Friction Adaptive Vehicle ControlMarch 2019October 2021Allow3120YesNo
16329465TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT VIA INTERNET OF THINGS (IOT) DEVICESFebruary 2019July 2021Allow2920YesNo
16174888VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICEOctober 2018December 2020Allow2620YesNo
15836223DEVICE AND METHOD FOR SUPERVISING AND MODIFYING VEHICLE OPERATIONDecember 2017March 2022Allow5130YesYes
15833998WEAR PART MONITORINGDecember 2017January 2023Abandon6060YesNo
14887272SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR HANDHELD DEVICE BASED BATTERY EFFICIENT CONTEXT MONITORING, DETECTION OF A VEHICULAR MOTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF A SPECIFIC VEHICLEOctober 2015September 2016Allow1100NoNo
14767079METHOD AND MEANS FOR OPERATING A FIRST MOTOR VEHICLE ON THE BASIS OF AT LEAST ONE CHARACTERISTIC OF AT LEAST ONE SECOND MOTOR VEHICLEAugust 2015November 2016Allow1620NoNo
14763197VEHICLE NAVIGATION APPARATUSJuly 2015May 2016Allow1010NoNo
14805998MONITORING BELT OPERATION TO PREDICT BELT LIFESPANJuly 2015December 2016Allow1700YesNo
14737126WHEEL ASSEMBLY ADJUSTMENT FOR VEHICLE EVENTSJune 2015February 2017Allow2010YesNo
14734505DUAL DISSIMILAR ENGINES FOR AN AIRCRAFTJune 2015July 2016Allow1410NoNo
14646329METHOD FOR CONSTRUCTING AIR-OBSERVED TERRAIN DATA BY USING ROTARY WING STRUCTUREMay 2015September 2016Allow1610NoNo
14564738VEHICLE CONTROL APPARATUSDecember 2014January 2016Allow1310NoNo
14462886AIRCRAFT MONITORING WITH IMPROVED SITUATIONAL AWARENESSAugust 2014April 2016Allow2010YesNo
14261444APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TESTING PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDApril 2014February 2015Allow1000NoNo
14260278SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR HANDHELD DEVICE BASED BATTERY EFFICIENT CONTEXT MONITORING, DETECTION OF A VEHICULAR MOTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF A SPECIFIC VEHICLEApril 2014July 2015Allow1510NoNo
14151797ENERGY HARVESTING POWER OUTPUT MEASUREMENT APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR CYCLINGJanuary 2014May 2015Allow1610NoNo
14104046SYSTEM FOR DETECTING RUN OVER ACCIDENTDecember 2013February 2015Allow1410NoNo
14015669UNOCCUPIED FLYING VEHICLE (UFV) LOCATION CONFIRMANCEAugust 2013August 2016Allow3540NoNo
13866743UNOCCUPIED FLYING VEHICLE (UFV) COORDINATIONApril 2013August 2016Allow4050NoNo
13800391BASE STATION MULTI-VEHICLE COORDINATIONMarch 2013August 2016Allow4160NoNo
13730202BASE STATION CONTROL FOR AN UNOCCUPIED FLYING VEHICLE (UFV)December 2012September 2016Allow4560NoNo
13728642INTER-VEHICLE FLIGHT ATTRIBUTE COMMUNICATION FOR AN UNOCCUPIED FLYING VEHICLE (UFV)December 2012August 2016Allow4460NoNo
13663590DETERMINATION OF A ROUTE OF A MOBILE DEVICE IN A MOBILE NETWORKOctober 2012April 2014Allow1710NoNo
13610059AUTOMATIC CLUTCH CONTROL DEVICE AND GEAR CHANGE CONTROL METHOD THEREFORSeptember 2012October 2013Allow1300NoNo
13579489VEHICLE WITH EXTERNAL CHARGINGAugust 2012October 2013Allow1410NoNo
13510905TILTING VEHICLE AND CONTROL SYSTEM THEREOFAugust 2012July 2013Allow1410NoNo
13561726SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NAVIGATIONJuly 2012October 2013Allow1410YesNo
13553966DEVICE AND METHOD FOR REGULATING THE HUMIDITY OF A FUEL CELLJuly 2012August 2013Allow1310YesNo
13388117SUSPENSION FAILURE DETECTION IN A RAIL VEHICLEJune 2012February 2014Allow2520NoNo
13484772METHOD FOR CALIBRATING AN ADAPTIVE CHASSIS SYSTEMMay 2012November 2013Allow1720YesNo
13377175METHOD AND MODULE FOR DETERMINING OF VELOCITY REFERENCE VALUES FOR A VEHICLE CONTROL SYSTEMDecember 2011September 2013Allow2110NoNo
13239867SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING MADE-TO-ORDER DESIGNS ON THE SURFACE OF AN EXTRATERRESTRIAL BODYSeptember 2011July 2013Allow2211NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
98.2%
Higher than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
99.1%
Higher 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, 100.0% 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.

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 is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE works in Art Unit 3666 and has examined 57 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 80.7%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 23 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE's allowance rate of 80.7% places them in the 53% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE receive 1.70 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 33% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE is 23 months. This places the examiner in the 86% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +23.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ANTONUCCI, ANNE MARIE. This interview benefit is in the 67% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 27.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 50% 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 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 19% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 21% percentile among all examiners. 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, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 46% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

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 42% 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.

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.