Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18814811 | Cloud Service Access Permission Setting Method for Enclave Instance and Cloud Management Platform | August 2024 | December 2025 | Allow | 39 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18672915 | SMART VEHICLE FIRE WARNING SYSTEM | May 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18665822 | COOLING DEVICE FOR ELECTRICALLY DRIVEN VEHICLE | May 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18705348 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR SECURE DATA STORAGE | April 2024 | August 2025 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18620936 | IPV6 ADDRESS TRANSLATION FOR COMPATIBILITY WITH MULTIPLE CARRIERS | March 2024 | May 2025 | Allow | 14 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18598639 | BATTERY ELECTRIC VEHICLE | March 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18497540 | METHOD FOR CREATING A MAP REPRESENTATION OF A ROAD TRAFFIC NETWORK FOR NAVIGATION OF A VEHICLE | October 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18098645 | STABILITY IN ARRANGEMENT OF PACKAGES DELIVERED BY DRONES | January 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17660889 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING ENHANCED SERVICES | April 2022 | July 2025 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17669410 | Remote Wireless Electric Frame | February 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17542070 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR COMPARING CROWD SOURCED THREAT MODELING SYSTEMS TO NON-INTEGRATED THREAT MODELING SYSTEMS | December 2021 | July 2024 | Allow | 32 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17542185 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THREAT MODEL KNOWLEDGE GRAPHS COMPRISING CROWDSOURCED MODELING CONTRIBUTIONS | December 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 32 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 17503766 | DATA AUDITING FOR OBJECT STORAGE PUBLIC CLOUDS | October 2021 | September 2024 | Allow | 35 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17451285 | GENERATING AND DISPLAYING CUSTOMIZED AVATARS IN ELECTRONIC MESSAGES | October 2021 | September 2024 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16973512 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING HARDWARE TROJAN CIRCUITS | December 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16970538 | First and Second Connections with an Authentication Management Function | August 2020 | July 2024 | Allow | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16055996 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DYNAMICALLY SETTING A RATE LIMIT FOR A COMPUTING DEVICE | August 2018 | January 2020 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15247141 | LOCATING SERVICE ENDPOINTS FROM A SERVICE REGISTRY | August 2016 | February 2020 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 15219985 | LOCATING SERVICE ENDPOINTS FROM A SERVICE REGISTRY | July 2016 | February 2020 | Allow | 43 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 13867177 | Splitting of Processing Logics Associated with Commands of Pages in a Distributed Application | April 2013 | August 2015 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13708946 | CANDIDATE SET SOLVER WITH USER ADVICE | December 2012 | February 2014 | Allow | 14 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13670800 | COMMUNICATION SYSTEM DETERMINING EFFECTIVE REMAINING TRANSMISSION RATE USING SMALL-SIZED TEST DATA BEFORE TRANSMITTING ACTUAL DATA | November 2012 | September 2014 | Allow | 23 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13455858 | SYSTEM AND METHOD TO ENHANCE USER PRESENCE MANAGEMENT TO ENABLE THE FEDERATION OF RICH MEDIA SESSIONS | April 2012 | November 2012 | Allow | 6 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13447925 | GENERATING PRODUCTION SERVER LOAD ACTIVITY FOR A TEST SERVER | April 2012 | March 2015 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13319590 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING PROCESSING ELEMENTS ALLOCATION | January 2012 | April 2015 | Allow | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13339356 | METHOD FOR MANAGING INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESSES IN NETWORK | December 2011 | October 2013 | Allow | 22 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13308881 | CANDIDATE SET SOLVER WITH USER ADVICE | December 2011 | December 2013 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13297314 | GENERATING PRODUCTION SERVER LOAD ACTIVITY FOR A TEST SERVER | November 2011 | March 2015 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13296993 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENTITLEMENT CONTROL VIA AN ENDPOINT DEVICE | November 2011 | February 2015 | Allow | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13099529 | PROGRAMMATICALLY SELECTING A SERVICE PROVIDER BASED ON ASSURED QUALITY OF SERVICE ATTRIBUTES | May 2011 | April 2014 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12888269 | COMPLIANCE PROTOCOL AND ARCHITECTURE | September 2010 | April 2014 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12756607 | CACHING OF PRIVATE DATA FOR A CONFIGURABLE TIME PERIOD | April 2010 | March 2011 | Allow | 11 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12625894 | INDEXING HETEROGENEOUS RESOURCES | November 2009 | April 2012 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12492759 | SYSTEM AND METHOD TO ENHANCE USER PRESENCE MANAGEMENT TO ENABLE THE FEDERATION OF RICH MEDIA SESSIONS | June 2009 | May 2012 | Allow | 34 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12365692 | VENDOR-INDEPENDENT NETWORK CONFIGURATION TOOL | February 2009 | September 2010 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12174083 | INTERNET MULTIMEDIA CONTENT DELIVERY TO CONSUMER ELECTRONIC DEVICES THROUGH WIRELESS NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE | July 2008 | May 2014 | Allow | 60 | 10 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12174189 | VIDEO DETECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF A SPORT OBJECT | July 2008 | September 2011 | Allow | 38 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12094351 | METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING FILE BASED ON MULTIPLEX FORWARDER | May 2008 | June 2010 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12123027 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MONITORING A REMOTE NETWORK | May 2008 | June 2011 | Allow | 37 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11968844 | Asset Monitoring System Using Multiple Imagers | January 2008 | May 2015 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11862734 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, METHOD, AND PROGRAM FOR GENERATING SETTING INFORMATION FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICE | September 2007 | December 2010 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11758519 | METHOD FOR CONTINUOUS ADAPTATION OF USER-SCOPED NAVIGATION TOPOLOGIES BASED ON CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION AND USER BEHAVIOR | June 2007 | August 2010 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11810009 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR REMOTELY ACCESSING DEVICES IN A NETWORK | June 2007 | June 2010 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11556402 | BUDDY LIST PRUNING FOR INSTANT MESSAGING SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT | November 2006 | September 2011 | Allow | 59 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11551704 | INTEGRATED NETWORK AND CUSTOMER DATABASE | October 2006 | October 2010 | Allow | 48 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11551278 | QUEUING OF INSTANT MESSAGING REQUESTS | October 2006 | October 2010 | Allow | 48 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11359377 | COMPUTER SYSTEM, STORAGE DEVICE, MANAGEMENT SERVER AND COMMUNICATION CONTROL METHOD | February 2006 | November 2009 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11353395 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTALLING SOFTWARE | February 2006 | May 2011 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11353416 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING AN EARLY NOTIFICATION WHEN PAGING A WIRELESS DEVICE | February 2006 | February 2014 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11352714 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PREDICTIVELY AND GRAPHICALLY ADMINISTERING A NETWORKED SYSTEM IN A TIME DIMENSION | February 2006 | November 2009 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11345547 | AUTHENTICATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR SIMPLE NETWORK MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL (SNMP) | February 2006 | September 2010 | Allow | 55 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11341651 | CACHING OF PRIVATE DATA FOR A CONFIGURABLE TIME PERIOD | January 2006 | March 2010 | Allow | 49 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R.
With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.
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, 28.6% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is below the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal has limited effectiveness in prompting favorable reconsideration.
⚠ Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R works in Art Unit 3667 and has examined 42 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 38 months.
Examiner PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 100% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R receive 2.14 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 58% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R is 38 months. This places the examiner in the 30% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R. This interview benefit is in the 16% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 36.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 81% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.
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 request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 50.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 45% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show below-average success with this examiner. Consider whether your arguments are strong enough to warrant a PAC request.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 63.6% of appeals filed. This is in the 43% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 14.3% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 33.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 21% 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 23.8% of allowed cases (in the 99% 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.