USPTO Examiner THROOP MYLES A - Art Unit 3679

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19280226FOLDING FRAMEJuly 2025January 2026Allow610NoNo
18931095SOFA BARRIEROctober 2024January 2026Allow1500NoNo
18676213SURGICAL CART SUPPORTING ONE OR MORE SURGICAL ROBOTIC ARMS AND INTERFACE MOVEABLY INTERCONNECTING SURGICAL CART WITH SURGICAL TABLEMay 2024November 2025Allow1800NoNo
18415708THICKNESS-ADJUSTABLE AIR MATTRESS STRUCTUREJanuary 2024February 2026Allow2510YesNo
18473759Medical Procedure Facilitation SystemSeptember 2023January 2026Allow2800NoNo
18217450SPRING MODULES FOR AN ADJUSTABLE SLEEPING SYSTEMJune 2023December 2025Allow3020YesNo
18211982SURGICAL FRAME HAVING TRANSLATING LOWER BEAM AND MOVEABLE LINKAGE OR SURGICAL EQUIPMENT ATTACHED THERETO AND METHOD FOR USE THEREOFJune 2023February 2026Allow3220NoNo
18255963EXERCISE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT BEDJune 2023February 2026Abandon3310NoNo
18203750ADJUSTABLE BEDMay 2023January 2026Allow3220NoNo
18144081MULTIFUNCTIONAL FOLDING CHAIRMay 2023November 2025Allow3010NoNo
18063625ROLLABLE PORTABLE PERSONAL BLANKETDecember 2022March 2026Abandon3920NoNo
17575426MEDICAL PROCEDURE FACILITATION SYSTEMJanuary 2022October 2025Allow4510YesNo
15482806CONVERTIBLE BED/WHEELCHAIR APPARATUSApril 2017September 2017Allow600NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner THROOP, MYLES A - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner THROOP, MYLES A works in Art Unit 3679 and has examined 1 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 6 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner THROOP, MYLES A'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.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by THROOP, MYLES A receive 0.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 1% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by THROOP, MYLES A is 6 months. This places the examiner in the 100% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 6% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

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 200.0% of allowed cases (in the 100% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic 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

    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.