Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19262259 | CORE SUPPORT AND MATTRESS USING THE SAME | July 2025 | January 2026 | Allow | 6 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 19238342 | APPARATUS FOR POSITIONING A PATIENT DURING SURGERY TO MAXIMIZE ACCESS TO A SURGICAL SITE OF INTEREST | June 2025 | September 2025 | Allow | 4 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 19005739 | TILTABLE BED FRAME | December 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 12 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18867566 | COIL SPRINGS, POCKETED COIL SPRINGS ASSEMBLIES, AND MATTRESSES INCLUDING THE SAME | November 2024 | October 2025 | Allow | 11 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18087973 | NOISE REDUCTION AND CANCELLATION SYSTEM FOR BEDS | December 2022 | March 2026 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17933622 | WEARABLE SUPPORT STRUCTURES FOR MEDICAL DEVICES | September 2022 | February 2026 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17736528 | MULTI-PURPOSE INFINITY TRAVEL PILLOW | May 2022 | February 2026 | Allow | 45 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17692959 | INTEGRATED FAN ASSEMBLY FOR BEDS | March 2022 | March 2026 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17642012 | SUPPORT APPARATUS, SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR POSITIONING A PATIENT | March 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 43 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17340823 | Configurable Multipurpose Hammock | June 2021 | December 2025 | Allow | 54 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 17263335 | INFECTION CONTROL BEDDING PRODUCTS AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURE THEREOF | January 2021 | August 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 3 | 1 | 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 LABARGE, ALISON N works in Art Unit 3679 and has examined 2 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 50.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 55 months.
Examiner LABARGE, ALISON N's allowance rate of 50.0% places them in the 12% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by LABARGE, ALISON N receive 4.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 99% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by LABARGE, ALISON N is 55 months. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 12.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 7% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 3% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 100% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 39% 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.