Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18755483 | IDENTIFYING AND REMOVING VEHICLE CONFLICT IN VEHICLE NETWORK | June 2024 | August 2025 | Abandon | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18298868 | SYSTEM FOR AN INTEGRATED FLIGHT DECK SUITE | April 2023 | October 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17795308 | Device and Method for Assisting a Driver of an Autonomous Vehicle | July 2022 | July 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17746296 | VEHICLE ASSISTANCE IN SMART INFRASTRUCTURE NODE ASSIST ZONE | May 2022 | June 2025 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17708011 | VEHICLE SCHEDULING METHOD, SYSTEM AND MAIN CONTROL DEVICE | March 2022 | July 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17035186 | PATH PROVIDING DEVICE AND PATH PROVIDING METHOD THEREOF | September 2020 | December 2022 | Abandon | 26 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17000913 | VEHICLE PARKING ASSIST APPARATUS | August 2020 | January 2023 | Abandon | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16917245 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION | June 2020 | October 2022 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16871343 | AUTONOMOUS DRIVING CONTROL DEVICE AND METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUS DRIVING CONTROL OF VEHICLES | May 2020 | June 2022 | Allow | 25 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16503495 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BATTERY MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT | July 2019 | September 2022 | Abandon | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16295006 | VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE, VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | March 2019 | January 2022 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16111376 | On Demand Autonomous Rail Transport | August 2018 | December 2020 | Abandon | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15967472 | USER INTERFACE THAT FACILITATES NODE PINNING FOR MONITORING AND ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE IN A COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT | April 2018 | April 2020 | Allow | 23 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15698056 | VIRTUAL MACHINE ACCESS CONTROL | September 2017 | February 2020 | Allow | 30 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15582108 | Systems and Methods For Automatically Characterizing Performance Of A Hypervisor System | April 2017 | June 2019 | Allow | 25 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 15282667 | COMPUTING SYSTEM INCLUDING ENHANCED APPLICATION PERFORMANCE BASED ON LAST COMPLETED OPERATION SEQUENCE VALUE | September 2016 | June 2019 | Allow | 32 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15269952 | Bandwidth Controlled Data Synchronization for Image and Vision Processor | September 2016 | July 2019 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 15255779 | PARALLELIZATION AND SYNCHRONIZATION OF PROCEDURES TO ENABLE OVERHEAD HIDING | September 2016 | June 2019 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15174941 | EXECUTING THREADS OF AN APPLICATION ACROSS MULTIPLE COMPUTING DEVICES IN A DISTRIBUTED VIRTUAL MACHINE ENVIRONMENT | June 2016 | March 2020 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14452488 | AUTOMATED COST CALCULATION FOR VIRTUALIZED INFRASTRUCTURE | August 2014 | February 2020 | Allow | 60 | 10 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14231661 | USING VIRTUAL LOCAL AREA NETWORKS IN A VIRTUAL COMPUTER SYSTEM | March 2014 | May 2020 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14162523 | MANAGEMENT OF COPY SERVICES RELATIONSHIPS VIA POLICIES SPECIFIED ON RESOURCE GROUPS | January 2014 | May 2014 | Allow | 3 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14031410 | MIGRATION MANAGEMENT APPARATUS AND MIGRATION MANAGEMENT METHOD | September 2013 | September 2015 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13690474 | ESTABLISHING A GROUP OF ENDPOINTS TO SUPPORT COLLECTIVE OPERATIONS WITHOUT SPECIFYING UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS FOR ANY ENDPOINTS | November 2012 | September 2015 | Allow | 33 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13685130 | Initiating Software Applications Requiring Different Processor Architectures in Respective Isolated Execution Environment of an Operating System | November 2012 | November 2015 | Allow | 46 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 13675669 | SCHEDULING VIRTUAL CENTRAL PROCESSING UNITS OF VIRTUAL MACHINES AMONG PHYSICAL PROCESSING UNITS | November 2012 | March 2015 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13667302 | IDENTIFYING DATA COMMUNICATIONS ALGORITHMS OF ALL OTHER TASKS IN A SINGLE COLLECTIVE OPERATION IN A DISTRIBUTED PROCESSING SYSTEM | November 2012 | August 2015 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13493142 | MANAGEMENT OF COPY SERVICES RELATIONSHIPS VIA POLICIES SPECIFIED ON RESOURCE GROUPS | June 2012 | October 2013 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13473664 | PERFORMING PRE-STAGE REPLICATION OF DATA ASSOCIATED WITH VIRTUAL MACHINES PRIOR TO MIGRATION OF VIRTUAL MACHINES BASED ON RESOURCE USAGE | May 2012 | August 2015 | Allow | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13458633 | VISUALIZATION-CENTRIC PERFORMANCE-BASED VOLUME ALLOCATION IN A DATA STORAGE SYSTEM | April 2012 | April 2014 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13428442 | ENABLING MULTI-TENANCY FOR INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT SOFTWARE IN VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS | March 2012 | March 2015 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13412521 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MANAGING PROCESSING RESOURCES IN A DISTRIBUTED PROCESSING SYSTEM | March 2012 | February 2015 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13325714 | VIRTUALIZING INTERRUPT PRIORITY AND DELIVERY | December 2011 | August 2014 | Allow | 32 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13310815 | PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS SYSTEM FOR ANALYZING INTER-THREAD COMMUNICATIONS TO ENHANCE PERFORMANCE IN MULTITHREADED SYSTEM | December 2011 | March 2015 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13262332 | TERMINAL DEVICE OF NON-ANDROID PLATFORM FOR EXECUTING ANDROID APPLICATIONS, AND COMPUTER READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM FOR STORING PROGRAM OF EXECUTING ANDROID APPLICATIONS ON NON-ANDROID PLATFORM | September 2011 | July 2013 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13241458 | MANUFACTURING PROCESS PRIORITIZATION BASED ON APPLYING RULES TO TASK-BASED DATA | September 2011 | June 2014 | Allow | 33 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13231326 | Establishing A Group Of Endpoints In A Parallel Computer | September 2011 | September 2015 | Allow | 48 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13202945 | ALLOCATION AND CONTROL UNIT FOR CONTROLLING PARALLEL EXECUTION OF THREADS ON AUXILIARY PROCESSING UNITS | August 2011 | December 2014 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13192025 | AUTOMATICALLY RECONFIGURING PHYSICAL SWITCHES TO BE IN SYNCHRONIZATION WITH CHANGES MADE TO ASSOCIATED VIRTUAL SYSTEM | July 2011 | November 2014 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13185856 | IDENTIFYING DATA COMMUNICATIONS ALGORITHMS OF ALL OTHER TASKS IN A SINGLE COLLECTIVE OPERATION IN A DISTRIBUTED PROCESSING SYSTEM | July 2011 | November 2013 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12980549 | PERFORMING SHADOWING FUNCTION BY VIRTUAL MACHINE MANAGER IN TWO-LEVEL VIRTUAL MACHINE ENVIRONMENT | December 2010 | August 2015 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12973117 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR TRANSFERRING THE OPERATION OF A VIRTUAL MACHINE FROM A SERVER DEVICE TO TERMINAL DEVICE USING OPERATING STATUS OF THE VIRTUAL MACHINE | December 2010 | September 2014 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12970754 | REMEDIATING GAPS BETWEEN USAGE ALLOCATION OF HARDWARE RESOURCE AND CAPACITY ALLOCATION OF HARDWARE RESOURCE | December 2010 | September 2014 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12964684 | MANAGEMENT OF COPY SERVICES RELATIONSHIPS VIA POLICIES SPECIFIED ON RESOURCE GROUPS | December 2010 | February 2013 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12948796 | IMPROVING PERFORMANCE IN A NESTED VIRTUALIZED ENVIRONMENT | November 2010 | January 2013 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12945488 | Increasing Parallel Program Performance for Irregular Memory Access Problems with Virtual Data Partitioning and Hierarchical Collectives | November 2010 | June 2014 | Allow | 43 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12647711 | PARALLELIZING HETEROGENEOUS NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS IN SMART DEVICES BASED ON SELECTION OF TASK ALLOCATION STRATEGY | December 2009 | August 2015 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12507960 | INTELLIGENTLY PRE-PLACING DATA FOR LOCAL CONSUMPTION BY WORKLOADS IN A VIRTUAL COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT | July 2009 | January 2014 | Allow | 54 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12522738 | APPLICATION SWITCHING IN A SINGLE THREADED ARCHITECTURE FOR DEVICES | July 2009 | June 2014 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12457700 | Virtualization apparatus and method for controlling access to hardware device by i/o request | June 2009 | April 2015 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11288823 | Acceleration threads on idle OS-visible thread execution units | November 2005 | December 2014 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner LEE, JAMES J.
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.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner LEE, JAMES J works in Art Unit 3668 and has examined 46 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 87.0%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 34 months.
Examiner LEE, JAMES J's allowance rate of 87.0% places them in the 65% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by LEE, JAMES J receive 2.20 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 60% 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 LEE, JAMES J is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 45% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +80.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LEE, JAMES J. This interview benefit is in the 99% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 32.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 68% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 25.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 34% 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, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 74% 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'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 42% 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.