USPTO Examiner REYES REGINALD R - Art Unit 3684

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18439698MEDICATION ORDER PROCESSING AND RECONCILIATIONFebruary 2024May 2025Abandon1520YesNo
18413592PRESCRIPTION COMPATIBILITY CHECKING FOR A MEDICAL DEVICEJanuary 2024January 2025Allow1210YesNo
18544892Apparatus for Recording Information Concerning the Use of an Injection DeviceDecember 2023November 2024Allow1110NoNo
18520496SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RAPID AND ACCURATE HISTOLOGIC ANALYSIS OF TUMOR MARGINS USING MACHINE LEARNINGNovember 2023December 2024Allow1310YesNo
18489074SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MAKING PERSONALIZED INDIVIDUAL UNIT DOSES CONTAINING PHARMACEUTICAL ACTIVESOctober 2023October 2024Allow1220YesNo
18243211SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MAKING PERSONALIZED INDIVIDUAL UNIT DOSES CONTAINING PHARMACEUTICAL ACTIVESSeptember 2023February 2025Allow1711NoNo
18358713SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR USE IN DIAGNOSING A MEDICAL CONDITION OF A PATIENTJuly 2023February 2025Abandon1920NoNo
18222580HEALTH CARE PRESCRIPTION SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN PATIENT AND HEALTH CARE PROVIDERJuly 2023July 2024Allow1220YesNo
18220897SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTAGIOUS ILLNESS SURVEILLANCE AND OUTBREAK DETECTIONJuly 2023June 2024Allow1110NoNo
18316960SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATED MEDICAL IMAGE ANALYSISMay 2023March 2025Abandon2220YesNo
17982812METHOD AND A SYSTEM FOR REAL TIME ANALYSIS OF RANGE OF MOTION (ROM)November 2022April 2025Allow2910YesNo
17891073SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING DIGITAL HEALTH SERVICESAugust 2022March 2025Allow3120YesNo
17889653PRESCRIPTION ASSISTANCE DEVICE AND PRESCRIPTION ASSISTANCE METHODAugust 2022February 2025Allow3010NoNo
17829708INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEMJune 2022March 2025Abandon3420NoNo
17705585AUGMENTED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR PHYSIOLOGICAL DATA PROCESSINGMarch 2022September 2023Abandon1821NoNo
17690790GENERATING CANDIDATE APPOINTMENT SLOTS FROM APPOINTMENT CONSTRAINTSMarch 2022October 2024Abandon3210YesNo
17690857INVENTORY PREDICTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMMarch 2022December 2024Abandon3310NoNo
17688655SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TRACKING A PORTION OF THE USER AS A PROXY FOR NON-MONITORED INSTRUMENTMarch 2022April 2025Allow3830NoNo
17651626MULTIMODAL BIOMARKERS PREDICTIVE OF TRANSDIAGNOSTIC SYMPTOM SEVERITYFebruary 2022March 2024Abandon2531YesNo
17634469SYSTEM AND METHOD OF EVALUATING A SUBJECT USING A WEARABLE SENSORFebruary 2022May 2025Abandon3920NoNo
17588624DYNAMIC HOME THEMES FOR ASSISTED EARLY DETECTION AND TREATMENT IN HEALTHCAREJanuary 2022June 2025Allow4130YesNo
17448283MEASUREMENT-FACILITATING DEVICE, METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM THAT RECORDS PROGRAMSeptember 2021December 2024Abandon3920NoNo
17465607System and Method for Providing Drive-Through Healthcare ServicesSeptember 2021April 2025Abandon4421NoNo
17226636SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS FOR EPISODE DETECTION AND EVALUATIONApril 2021May 2025Allow4930YesNo
17215156WORKSTATION ASSIGNMENTMarch 2021December 2024Allow4430YesNo
17186812SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INTEGRATION OF TELEMEDICINE INTO MULTIMEDIA VIDEO VISITATION SYSTEMS IN CORRECTIONAL FACILITIESFebruary 2021November 2024Allow4450YesNo
17181820METHOD FOR SAMPLE TEST COUNTINGFebruary 2021April 2025Abandon5040YesNo
17175808SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ASSIGNING EXAMS TO PHYSICIANSFebruary 2021December 2024Abandon4621YesNo
17103608METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR IMPROVING BREATHING THERAPY COMPLIANCENovember 2020November 2024Abandon4840YesNo
16785436SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND DEVICES FOR BIOPHYSICAL MODELING AND RESPONSE PREDICTIONFebruary 2020June 2025Allow6040YesYes
16531170SURGICAL INSTRUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMAugust 2019February 2025Abandon6040YesYes
16305468METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR PREDICTING DEPRESSION TREATMENT OUTCOMESNovember 2018December 2024Abandon6061YesNo
16141459SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT OF POLICIESSeptember 2018July 2024Allow6060YesNo
15090466PHARMACOGENETIC DRUG INTERACTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMApril 2016January 2019Allow3371YesYes
13826972BID-BASED REQUESTS FOR ELECTRONIC RESOURCESMarch 2013August 2019Allow6031YesYes
12709634USER-BASED HEALTH MONITORINGFebruary 2010June 2011Allow1610NoNo
12527188METHOD OF PROCESSING A RADON DATA BASED IMAGE FUNCTION AND IMAGING METHODDecember 2009August 2013Allow4920NoNo
12615418METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED INTERPRETATION OF COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY SCAN DATANovember 2009May 2013Allow4220YesNo
12272319EMERGENCY ALERT FEATURE ON A MOBILE COMMUNICATION DEVICENovember 2008June 2012Allow4330YesNo
10593138EN-ROUTE NAVIGATION DISPLAY METHOD AND APPARATUS USING HEAD-UP DISPLAYSeptember 2008April 2013Allow6021YesNo
12072240Method and system for managing delivery of content in a navigational environmentFebruary 2008March 2015Allow6040YesNo
11925100SYSTEM FOR COMMUNICATION OF HEALTH CARE DATAOctober 2007August 2010Allow3410YesNo
11977174METHODS AND SYSTEMS RELATED TO RECEIVING NUTRACEUTICAL ASSOCIATED INFORMATIONOctober 2007March 2011Allow4110YesNo
11888613METHODS AND SYSTEMS RELATED TO TRANSMISSION OF NUTRACEUTICAL ASSOCIATED INFORMATIONJuly 2007August 2010Allow3610YesNo
11824529COMPUTATIONAL SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO NUTRACEUTICALSJune 2007January 2019Allow6080YesYes
11758716PATIENT DATA MINING FOR LUNG CANCER SCREENINGJune 2007December 2013Allow6070YesNo
11013927METHOD, SYSTEM, AND SOFTWARE FOR ANALYSIS OF A BILLING PROCESSDecember 2004September 2011Allow6020YesYes
11004134USER-BASED HEALTH MONITORINGDecember 2004January 2010Allow6041YesNo
10956265SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MEDICAL APPOINTMENT AND EXAMINATION SEQUENCE PLANNINGOctober 2004June 2010Allow6030YesNo
10681954Method for storing and reporting pharmacy dataOctober 2003January 2014Allow6040YesYes
10669132SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONSUMERS TO PURCHASE HEALTH CARE AND RELATED PRODUCTSSeptember 2003December 2009Allow6020YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner REYES, REGINALD R.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
4
Examiner Affirmed
2
(50.0%)
Examiner Reversed
2
(50.0%)
Reversal Percentile
77.5%
Higher than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
9
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(22.2%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
7
(77.8%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
26.6%
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, 22.2% 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 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 shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner REYES, REGINALD R - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner REYES, REGINALD R works in Art Unit 3684 and has examined 49 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 69.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner REYES, REGINALD R's allowance rate of 69.4% places them in the 24% 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 REYES, REGINALD R receive 2.76 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 91% 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 REYES, REGINALD R is 41 months. This places the examiner in the 7% 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 +27.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by REYES, REGINALD R. This interview benefit is in the 78% 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, 25.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 32% 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 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 42% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 66.7% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 54% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 60.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 31% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 33.3% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% 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 12.2% of allowed cases (in the 97% 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 37% 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 extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.