USPTO Examiner HANKS BENJAMIN L - Art Unit 3684

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18770649SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPROVING A COGNITIVE STATE OF A PATIENT THROUGH CUSTOMIZED MUSIC THERAPYJuly 2024February 2026Abandon1910NoNo
18597656WELL-BEING PLATFORM UTILIZING MACHINE LEARNINGMarch 2024November 2025Abandon2040YesNo
18499979VIRTUAL REALITY ENABLED NEUROTHERAPY FOR IMPROVING SPATIAL-TEMPORAL NEUROCOGNITIVE PROCESSINGNovember 2023March 2025Abandon1610NoNo
18287509SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EARLY DETECTION OF A PSYCHOTHERAPEUTIC TREATMENT RESPONSEOctober 2023February 2026Abandon2810NoNo
18483390SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING DEPRESSION IN A DIALYSIS PATIENTOctober 2023February 2026Abandon2820YesNo
18552790SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INCREASING THERMOMETRIC RELIABILITYSeptember 2023October 2025Abandon2410NoNo
18236789SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ORGAN SHAPE ANALYSIS FOR DISEASE DIAGNOSIS AND RISK ASSESSMENTAugust 2023May 2025Abandon2000NoNo
18301697SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING RELEVANT STUDIESApril 2023September 2025Abandon2910NoNo
18119654SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EXCLUDED RISK FACTOR PREDICTIVE MODELINGMarch 2023September 2024Allow1820YesNo
18179572TECHNIQUES FOR FACILITATING VETERINARY SERVICESMarch 2023April 2025Abandon2510NoNo
18111555METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETECTING ENVIRONMENT FEATURES IN IMAGES TO PREDICT LOCATION-BASED HEALTH METRICSFebruary 2023January 2025Allow2220NoNo
18094436METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PREDICTING NEUROLOGICAL TREATMENTJanuary 2023March 2025Abandon2610NoNo
18061154SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VERIFICATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THERAPEUTIC ENERGY PULSESDecember 2022September 2025Abandon3430NoYes
17973779CLOUD SERVER, COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM, AND CLOUD SYSTEMOctober 2022September 2025Abandon3530YesNo
17932501SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND DEVICES FOR REMOTELY DEPLOYED DIAGNOSTIC TESTINGSeptember 2022April 2025Abandon3110NoNo
17872092ELECTRONIC EVALUATION SYSTEMJuly 2022October 2024Abandon2730NoNo
17777839INFORMATION ACQUISITION METHOD, INFORMATION PROVIDING METHOD, INFORMATION INTERACTION METHOD AND APPARATUS THEREOFMay 2022February 2026Abandon4530NoNo
17709838REAL-TIME SYSTEM FOR MONITORING AND ANALYZING VOLUME OF SUBSTANCE INTRODUCED INTO THE BODY AND VOLUME OF METABOLIC WASTE EXPELLED FROM THE BODYMarch 2022November 2024Abandon3210NoNo
17709209SYSTEM, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR STREAMLINING AUTHORIZATION FOR MEDICAL PAYMENT ADJUDICATIONMarch 2022April 2025Abandon3610YesNo
17677918MEDICAL CARE SUPPORT DEVICEFebruary 2022August 2025Abandon4230YesNo
17677884OPTIMAL STIMULATION POSITION CALCULATION METHOD, SERVER AND COMPUTER PROGRAM USING AI MODELFebruary 2022December 2025Abandon4520NoNo
17635788Universal tinnitus management system (UTMS)February 2022November 2025Abandon4530YesNo
17567135DIAGNOSING SKIN CONDITIONS USING MACHINE-LEARNED MODELSJanuary 2022November 2025Abandon4630YesNo
17617293INCIDENCE RATE MONITORING METHOD, APPARATUS AND DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMDecember 2021February 2026Abandon5010NoNo
17518443Communication System and MethodNovember 2021November 2024Abandon3730YesNo
17497501METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR TREATING GASTROINTESTINAL AND INFLAMMATORY HEALTH CONDITIONS USING PRESCRIPTION DIGITAL THERAPEUTICSOctober 2021December 2024Abandon3810NoNo
17497499METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR TREATING HEALTH CONDITIONS USING PRESCRIPTION DIGITAL THERAPEUTICSOctober 2021December 2024Abandon3810NoNo
17599898Non-face-to-face AI occupational therapy assistance system and operating method using blockchainSeptember 2021November 2024Abandon3810NoNo
17487612PATIENT MONITORING, REPORTING AND TRACKING SYSTEMSeptember 2021October 2024Abandon3610NoNo
17487479SPLIT VISION VISUAL TESTSeptember 2021January 2025Allow3930YesNo
17487341STORAGE MEDIUM AND PATIENT INFORMATION MANAGEMENT DEVICESeptember 2021August 2025Abandon4630YesNo
17363687PREDICTIVE DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES FOR CROSS-TREND DISEASE TRANSMISSION DETECTIONJune 2021November 2025Abandon5340YesNo
17241892SECURE REMOTE HEALTH DATAApril 2021October 2024Allow4130YesNo
17221329CONTACT TRACING OF EPIDEMIC-INFECTED AND IDENTIFICATION OF ASYMPTOMATIC CARRIERSApril 2021February 2025Abandon4630YesNo
17211349SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTIFYING AND ISOLATING PERSONS SUSPECTED OF HAVING AN INFECTIOUS DISEASEMarch 2021March 2025Abandon4820NoNo
17200446Systems and Methods for Medical Concept MappingMarch 2021June 2025Abandon5130NoNo
17033667Secure Scalable Real-Time Machine Learning Platform for HealthcareSeptember 2020August 2023Abandon3520NoNo
16962088DETECTING RECURRENCE OF A MEDICAL CONDITIONJuly 2020July 2024Allow4860YesNo
16314132SYSTEM AND ARCHITECTURE FOR SEAMLESS WORKFLOW INTEGRATION AND ORCHESTRATION OF CLINICAL INTELLIGENCEDecember 2018May 2025Abandon6080NoYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HANKS, BENJAMIN L.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
17.9%
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
9.9%
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 HANKS, BENJAMIN L - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HANKS, BENJAMIN L works in Art Unit 3684 and has examined 16 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 18.8%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 46 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HANKS, BENJAMIN L's allowance rate of 18.8% 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 HANKS, BENJAMIN L receive 2.81 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 82% 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 HANKS, BENJAMIN L is 46 months. This places the examiner in the 11% 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 +42.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HANKS, BENJAMIN L. This interview benefit is in the 89% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 11.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 6% 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 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 0.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 2% 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 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.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.