USPTO Examiner EZEWOKO MICHAEL I - Art Unit 3681

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18985338EVALUATION SYSTEM BASED ON ANALYTE DATADecember 2024January 2026Allow1300YesNo
18970107ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BASED TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING PATIENT INTAKEDecember 2024January 2026Allow1300YesNo
18743321DIGITAL TWINJune 2024October 2025Allow1600YesNo
18734060COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHODS AND EVALUATION SYSTEMS FOR EVALUATING AT LEAST ONE IMAGE DATA SET OF AN IMAGING REGION OF A PATIENT, COMPUTER PROGRAMS AND ELECTRONICALLY READABLE STORAGE MEDIUMSJune 2024March 2025Allow900YesNo
18680204MULTI-DIMENSIONAL PHENOTYPIC SPACE FOR GENOTYPE TO PHENOTYPE MAPPING AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN OF CANCER DRUG THERAPIES USING A DEEP LEARNING NETMay 2024October 2025Allow1600YesNo
18656324SENSOR-BASED IOT MEDICAL INSTRUMENT USE, STERILIZATION, AND INVENTORY TRACKING SYSTEMMay 2024January 2026Allow2010NoNo
18634608MEDICATION THERAPY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHODSApril 2024January 2026Allow2110YesNo
18400688TRACKING SYSTEM FOR HOUSEHOLD ARTICLES AND SUPPLIESDecember 2023November 2025Abandon2310NoNo
18491988LEARNING FROM TRIAGE ANNOTATIONSOctober 2023February 2026Abandon2710NoNo
18370603METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND APPARATUSES FOR DOSE OPTIMIZATIONSeptember 2023September 2025Allow2410YesNo
18463413METHOD AND DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING CONSTIPATION USING MACHINE LEARNING MODELSeptember 2023September 2025Allow2410NoNo
18226708SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING TEST RESULTS OF GENE SEQUENCING DATA ON A RECURRING BASISJuly 2023August 2025Allow2520YesNo
18354830INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUMJuly 2023June 2025Allow2310YesNo
18346717METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR EARLY DETECTION OF COVID-19July 2023April 2025Allow2200YesNo
18213965MEDICAL DEVICE MANAGEMENT METHOD AND RELATED DEVICEJune 2023June 2025Allow2400YesNo
18212496SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CLUSTERING PHYSIOLOGICAL EVENTSJune 2023September 2025Allow2710YesNo
18038862IMPROVED CLINICIAN-CENTERED CLINICAL TRIAL VERIFICATION SYSTEM AND METHODMay 2023September 2025Abandon2710NoNo
18037976SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ASSESSING SURGICAL ABILITYMay 2023June 2025Allow2520YesNo
18143260MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION OF DATA FOR DIGITAL THERAPEUTICS TRIALSMay 2023June 2025Allow2620YesNo
18310816MEDICAL RECORD GENERATION PLATFORMMay 2023June 2025Abandon2510NoNo
18032617RAPID AND DIRECT IDENTIFICATION AND DETERMINATION OF URINE BACTERIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY TO ANTIBIOTICSApril 2023June 2025Abandon2610NoNo
18249109CONVEYING AGGREGATE PSYCHOLOGICAL STATES OF MULTIPLE INDIVIDUALSApril 2023September 2025Allow2910YesNo
18189485METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR SELECTING CRITERIA SUBSETS FOR PERFORMING A MEDICAL NECESSITY REVIEW FOR A PATIENT CARE PLANMarch 2023June 2025Allow2700YesNo
18103296Method And Apparatus for Evaluating Proficiency in Time Marking SectionJanuary 2023August 2025Abandon3010YesNo
18005910SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATICALLY EVALUATING VIRTUAL PATIENT FITTING OF MEDICAL DEVICESJanuary 2023September 2025Allow3210YesNo
18089863Mental Health Anomaly Detection and GuidanceDecember 2022June 2025Allow3020NoNo
18069917Selection Of A Wearable Article For A Medical DeviceDecember 2022March 2025Allow2710YesNo
18070240METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENTLY TRANSMITTING NUCLEIC ACID AMPLIFICATION RESULT DATA MADE BY MEASURING INSTRUMENTNovember 2022September 2025Abandon3320YesNo
17923958SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TESTING FOR SARS-COV-2/COVID-19 BASED ON WEARABLE MEDICAL SENSORS AND NEURAL NETWORKSNovember 2022April 2025Allow2900YesNo
17972048ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TRIAGE DISPOSITION PROCESSOctober 2022October 2025Allow3620YesNo
18045188HEALTH MANAGEMENT DEVICE, HEALTH MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMOctober 2022February 2026Abandon4020NoNo
17961900TELECOMMUNICATION APPARATUS AND METHODOctober 2022May 2025Allow3110YesNo
17891063SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING DIGITAL HEALTH SERVICESAugust 2022September 2025Allow3710NoNo
17818239CODE GENERATOR FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH STUDY SYSTEMSAugust 2022March 2025Allow3110YesNo
17815735SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR RAPID VETTING OF COUNSELORS VIA GRADED SIMULATED EXCHANGESJuly 2022August 2025Abandon3620NoNo
17794680SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DATA-DRIVEN INDIVIDUALIZED NUTRITIONJuly 2022June 2025Allow3420NoNo
17766661Diagnostic ToolApril 2022September 2025Allow4121NoNo
17763794EFFICIENT DIAGNOSIS OF BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS, DEVELOPMENTAL DELAYS, AND NEUROLOGICAL IMPAIRMENTSMarch 2022September 2025Allow4210YesNo
17638131SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DEFINING A USER EXPERIENCE OF MEDICAL DATA SYSTEMS THROUGH A KNOWLEDGE GRAPHFebruary 2022December 2024Abandon3410YesNo
17650391SAFE PACKAGE HANDLINGFebruary 2022August 2025Abandon4310NoNo
16356726METHODS AND SYSTEMS OF SELECTIVE MARKETING USING AGGREGATED CELEBRATORY DATESMarch 2019September 2025Allow6040YesYes
15633398First Party Cookie AttributionJune 2017September 2017Allow300YesNo
14176634ADVERTISEMENT DISTRIBUTION DEVICE AND ADVERTISEMENT DISTRIBUTION METHODFebruary 2014May 2019Allow6040YesNo
14133568GAME-BASED AUTOMATED AGENT DETECTIONDecember 2013May 2019Allow6040YesNo
13593551MESSAGE SELECTION IN A MARKETING-BASED SYSTEMAugust 2012April 2016Allow4340YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner EZEWOKO, MICHAEL I.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
17.6%
Lower than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
9.6%
Lower 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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.

Strategic Recommendations

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 EZEWOKO, MICHAEL I - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner EZEWOKO, MICHAEL I works in Art Unit 3681 and has examined 5 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 10000 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner EZEWOKO, MICHAEL I'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 EZEWOKO, MICHAEL I receive 3.20 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 90% 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by EZEWOKO, MICHAEL I is 10000 months. This places the examiner in the 1% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 39% 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 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.

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 20% 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, 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 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 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:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.