USPTO Examiner KANAAN LIZA TONY - Art Unit 3683

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18730913SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SKIN BIOMOLECULAR PROFILE ASSESSMENT USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCEJuly 2024February 2026Abandon1910NoNo
18717457DISPLAYING RELEVANT PRIOR REPORTS IN A TELEMEDICINE SETTINGJune 2024February 2026Abandon2010NoNo
18656101SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DRUG-AGNOSTIC PATIENT-SPECIFIC DOSING REGIMENSMay 2024October 2025Abandon1710NoNo
18407756PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE SYSTEMJanuary 2024March 2025Abandon1410NoNo
18385530SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND APPARATUSES FOR SECURE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENTS AND AUTHENTICATING DIAGNOSED USERSOctober 2023December 2024Abandon1310NoNo
18270748SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MEASURING AN INDIVIDUAL'S HEALTH AND FITNESS LEVELSJuly 2023August 2025Abandon2510NoNo
18332934MEDICAL SYSTEM WITH DOCKING STATION AND MOBILE MACHINEJune 2023March 2025Abandon2120YesNo
18107050CLINICAL TRIAL VERIFICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD IMPROVEMENT INCLUDING A COMBINED SCREENSHARING, VIDEO CONFERENCING, SOURCE CAPTURE AND eCRF/CLINICAL TRIAL DOCUMENT RECONCILIATION SYSTEMFebruary 2023October 2025Abandon3310NoNo
18018427METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING POPULATION PHARMACOKINETIC MODEL OF PROPOFOL AND DERIVATIVE THEREOFJanuary 2023January 2026Abandon3520NoNo
18076452AUTOMATED TICKET ATTACHMENT CREATIONDecember 2022December 2025Abandon3620NoNo
17978790Capturing Detailed Structure from Patient-Doctor Conversations for Use in Clinical DocumentationNovember 2022January 2026Abandon3840YesNo
17922017DISEASE PREDICTION METHODS AND DEVICES, ELECTRONIC DEVICES, AND COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIAOctober 2022November 2025Abandon3720YesNo
17958756SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CREDENTIALING HEALTHCARE PROVIDERSOctober 2022March 2025Abandon3010NoNo
17929757INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAMSeptember 2022June 2025Abandon3320NoNo
17801745BIOMARKER COMPUTING DEVICE AND BIOMARKER COMPUTING METHODAugust 2022January 2025Abandon2910NoNo
17819609SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DIGITAL IMAGING AND COMMUNICATIONS IN MEDICINE FILE PROCESSINGAugust 2022June 2025Abandon3420NoNo
17863476SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CARING FOR PATIENTS BY USING A SMART DIAPERJuly 2022December 2024Abandon2910NoNo
17860086MANAGING SERVER, MANAGING METHOD AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR OPERATING BIOMETRIC INFORMATION-BASED ACCESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMJuly 2022June 2025Abandon3620YesNo
17729535SYSTEMS FOR MANAGING ALARMS FROM MEDICAL DEVICESApril 2022November 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17568291PATIENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMJanuary 2022May 2025Abandon4020NoNo
17608374TRACKING AND VALIDATING TIME OF PORTABLE DIGITAL RECORDING DEVICESNovember 2021May 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17452899OMNICHANNEL THERAPEUTIC PLATFORMOctober 2021October 2024Allow3610YesNo
17451465SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR EXAM SUGGESTIONS USING A DATABASEOctober 2021October 2025Abandon4830YesNo
17500909MEDICAL REMOTE DATA MONITORING AND FEEDBACK FOR IMPROVED OUTCOMESOctober 2021December 2025Abandon5030YesNo
17424329REHABILITATION SYSTEM AND IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS FOR HIGHER BRAIN DYSFUNCTIONJuly 2021December 2024Allow4121YesNo
17415048INTEGRATED DIAGNOSTICS SYSTEMS AND METHODSJune 2021December 2025Abandon5440NoNo
17414937METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR RADIOTHERAPY TREATMENT PLANNING BASED ON DEEP TRANSFER LEARNINGJune 2021November 2025Allow5340YesYes
17413432BONE DENSITY MODELING AND ORTHOPEDIC SURGICAL PLANNING SYSTEMJune 2021October 2025Abandon5340YesNo
17299442Medical Data Management Method, Apparatus, System, and ServerJune 2021February 2025Abandon4420NoNo
17335669EFFICIENCY OF MOTION MONITORING AND ANALYSIS FOR A SURGICAL PROCEDUREJune 2021January 2026Abandon5550NoNo
17331623Method and System for Remote Augmented Reality Medical ExaminationMay 2021September 2025Abandon5230NoNo
17243064SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE MANAGEMENT PROVIDING HISTORICAL DATA-BASED FORECASTING FOR CLINICAL TRIALSApril 2021October 2024Abandon4240NoNo
17156278COOPERATIVE PROCESSING OF SURGICAL SENSOR-DATA STREAMSJanuary 2021September 2025Abandon5660NoNo
17129336HEALTHCARE CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMDecember 2020August 2025Abandon5640YesNo
17125499DYNAMIC EPISODIC NETWORKSDecember 2020October 2024Abandon4610NoNo
17059950DIAGNOSIS SUPPORT SYSTEMNovember 2020November 2024Abandon4730NoNo
16938816DEVICE FOR MEASURING ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AND RECOMMENDING PERSONALIZED MITIGATING REGIMENJuly 2020February 2026Abandon6070YesYes
16896694UI DESIGN FOR PATIENT AND CLINICIAN CONTROLLER DEVICES OPERATIVE IN A REMOTE CARE ARCHITECTUREJune 2020November 2025Allow6071NoNo
16858407MULTI-MODALITY ELECTRONIC INVITE ROUTING SYSTEM AND PROCESS FOR TELEHEALTH LANGUAGE INTERPRETATION SESSIONApril 2020November 2024Abandon5420NoYes
16803800CONNECTIVITY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A TELEHEALTH PLATFORM WITH THIRD-PARTY WEB SERVICESFebruary 2020March 2025Abandon6040NoYes
16422934DIABETES RISK ENGINE AND METHODS THEREOF FOR PREDICTING DIABETES PROGRESSION AND MORTALITYMay 2019February 2025Abandon6070YesNo
16373619System and method for using unique identifying data for precautionary determination to send notifications to a user to reduce potential negative health outcomes related to implantable devices and recall, adverse event dataApril 2019November 2024Abandon6020NoYes
16010215GEOGRAPHIC UTILIZATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN REAL-TIME FOR DISEASE IDENTIFICATION AND ALERT NOTIFICATIONJune 2018January 2025Abandon6080NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner KANAAN, LIZA TONY.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
3
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
17.8%
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
5
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(20.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
4
(80.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
26.1%
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, 20.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is below the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal has limited effectiveness in prompting favorable reconsideration.

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 KANAAN, LIZA TONY - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner KANAAN, LIZA TONY works in Art Unit 3683 and has examined 23 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 17.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner KANAAN, LIZA TONY's allowance rate of 17.4% places them in the 2% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by KANAAN, LIZA TONY receive 3.83 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 96% 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 KANAAN, LIZA TONY is 53 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +26.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by KANAAN, LIZA TONY. This interview benefit is in the 73% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 3.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 2% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 9.1% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 9% 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, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 99% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 25.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 3% 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 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, 133.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 97% 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 40% 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 43% 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:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • 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.
  • Request pre-appeal conferences: PACs are highly effective with this examiner. Before filing a full appeal brief, request a PAC to potentially resolve issues without full PTAB review.
  • 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.