Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18693094 | System for cancer progression risk determination | March 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 22 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18424330 | HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, HEALTH MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM | January 2024 | January 2026 | Abandon | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18167691 | PREDICTING ADVERSE HEALTH RISK BASED ON CT SCAN IMAGES AND AI-ENABLED CARDIOVASCULAR STRUCTURE VOLUMETRY | February 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 36 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17887016 | TECHNOLOGIES FOR EFFICIENTLY PRODUCING DOCUMENTATION FROM VOICE DATA IN A HEALTHCARE FACILITY | August 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 15733914 | AN APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING CONTEXT-BASED INTERVENTION | December 2020 | November 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16672576 | WEATHER TRIGGER MAPPING ENGINE | November 2019 | May 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14554514 | PRINT CONTROL SYSTEM AND PRINT CONTROL METHOD | November 2014 | May 2019 | Allow | 53 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14451631 | TIME TRACKING SYSTEM AND METHOD OF USER | August 2014 | February 2015 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13073682 | MESSAGE BROADCASTING NETWORK USAGE BILLING SYSTEM AND METHOD | March 2011 | July 2013 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12745377 | SUBSTRATE SURFACE INSPECTING APPARATUS AND SUBSTRATE SURFACE INSPECTING METHOD | July 2010 | April 2013 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11626450 | MONITORING USAGE RATE PATTERNS IN STORAGE RESOURCES | January 2007 | December 2009 | Allow | 35 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11602462 | MESSAGE BROADCASTING BILLING SYSTEM AND METHOD | November 2006 | January 2011 | Allow | 50 | 0 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11314373 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING SERVICE LEVELS PROVIDED BY SERVICE PROVIDERS | December 2005 | December 2012 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ROJAS, HAJIME S.
With a 50.0% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.
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, 50.0% 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.
✓ Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner ROJAS, HAJIME S works in Art Unit 3682 and has examined 9 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 77.8%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 50 months.
Examiner ROJAS, HAJIME S's allowance rate of 77.8% places them in the 45% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by ROJAS, HAJIME S receive 2.33 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 66% 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 ROJAS, HAJIME S is 50 months. This places the examiner in the 6% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -28.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ROJAS, HAJIME S. This interview benefit is in the 1% 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, 20.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 21% 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 16.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 19% 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 33.3% of appeals filed. This is in the 5% 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.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 11.1% of allowed cases (in the 94% 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 43% 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.