Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18629487 | Automated System for Secure, Anonymized Medical Claim Data Processing and Collateralization Management | April 2024 | January 2026 | Abandon | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18610949 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PATIENT ASSESSMENT USING DISPARATE DATA SOURCES AND DATA-INFORMED CLINICIAN GUIDANCE VIA A SHARED PATIENT/CLINICIAN USER INTERFACE | March 2024 | February 2026 | Abandon | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18478856 | Automatic Item Placement Recommendations Based on Entity Similarity | September 2023 | February 2026 | Abandon | 28 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18256634 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MONITORING WOUND THERAPY | June 2023 | February 2026 | Abandon | 32 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18043751 | METHOD FOR DETERMINING DIETARY FOOD PATTERNS IN LACTATING WOMEN | March 2023 | April 2025 | Abandon | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18170558 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR REPRESENTATION AND ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL PERCEPTUAL, VISUAL MOTOR, AND NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTION | February 2023 | December 2025 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18073147 | METHOD OF PREDICTING FETAL OR NEONATAL DISEASE BASED ON STAGE OF MATERNAL PERIODONTITIS | December 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 39 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17957163 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFYING ASSETS AND AUTOMATING THE CREATION AND MONETIZATION OF ADVERTISEMENTS | September 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 26 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17935464 | AUTOMATED MEASUREMENT AND ANALYTICS SOFTWARE FOR OUT OF HOME CONTENT DELIVERY | September 2022 | January 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17949140 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PSYCHOSOCIAL TECHNOLOGY PROTOCOL FOCUSED ON THE REDUCTION FOR CAREGIVER BURNOUT AND NURSING HOME PLACEMENT AND CAREGIVER INSURANCE | September 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17895935 | Private Computation of Multi-Touch Attribution | August 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 26 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17817121 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRE-MEDICAL MONITORING AND EFFICIENT PATIENT NAVIGATION | August 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17858330 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR GENERATING INTERPRETABLE PREDICTION RESULT FOR PATIENT | July 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17810063 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR FACILITATING PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS BY LEVERAGING GEOLOCATION DATA | June 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 35 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17809648 | PLACEMENT OF ADVERTISEMENTS IN PLAYBACK | June 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 34 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17847923 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR COMMUNICATING WITH USERS | June 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 33 | 8 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17664854 | SYSTEM FOR TREATMENT PLANNING ENVIRONMENTS | May 2022 | July 2025 | Abandon | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17767901 | TEMPORAL MODELING OF NEURODEGENERATIVE DISEASES | April 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17715095 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BASED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DOCUMENTING MEDICAL PROCEDURES | April 2022 | October 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17710013 | LABOR ONSET AND BIRTH IDENTIFICATION AND PREDICTION FROM WEARABLE-BASED PHYSIOLOGICAL DATA | March 2022 | October 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17693235 | SYSTEM FOR RENDERING ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD DATA AND LANGUAGE INTERPRETATION DATA ON DISPARATE DEVICES AT A HEALTHCARE PROVIDER LOCATION | March 2022 | September 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17654267 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONDUCTING EYE MOVEMENT DESENSITIZATION AND REPROCESSING | March 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17585371 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR REDUCING HOSPITAL SUPPLY COSTS USING MIXED INTEGER LINEAR PROGRAMMING | January 2022 | November 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17647932 | PROCESSING GENERATED SENSOR DATA ASSOCIATED WITH LYMPHEDEMA DEVICE USAGE | January 2022 | November 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17538929 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | November 2021 | August 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17526459 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR COMMUNICATING WITH DEVICES WITH A CUSTOMIZED ADAPTIVE USER EXPERIENCE | November 2021 | October 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17522277 | FEDERATED MACHINE LEARNING BASED BROWSER EXTENSION | November 2021 | June 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17453795 | SYSTEM AND METHOD OF ITEM DISTRIBUTION | November 2021 | September 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17604074 | PRIME DIFFERENTIATION IN MEDICATION DELIVERY SYSTEM | October 2021 | July 2025 | Abandon | 45 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17463699 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH DATA PROCESSING, ACQUISITION AND ANALYSIS | September 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17394034 | Electronic Device for Providing User Activity Information in a Platform and Method Thereof | August 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17414198 | A METHOD AND DEVICE FOR BUILDING A MODEL FOR PREDICTING EVOLUTION OVER TIME OF A VISION-RELATED PARAMETER | June 2021 | March 2026 | Abandon | 57 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16785679 | CONSUMER-SPECIFIC ADVERTISEMENT PRESENTATION AND OFFER LIBRARY | February 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 56 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16653863 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETECTION OF ADVERTISEMENT FRAUD | October 2019 | January 2022 | Abandon | 27 | 7 | 0 | No | No |
| 14498494 | COMPUTERIZED SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO CONTROLLED CONTENT OPTIMIZATION | September 2014 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 16 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14140161 | AUDIENCE USAGE PATTERN ANALYSIS | December 2013 | December 2018 | Allow | 60 | 10 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13734924 | Platform-Aware Commercial Content Resolution | January 2013 | May 2017 | Allow | 53 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ROBINSON, KYLE G.
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.
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.
⚠ 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 ROBINSON, KYLE G works in Art Unit 3685 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 23.1%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 46 months.
Examiner ROBINSON, KYLE G's allowance rate of 23.1% places them in the 3% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by ROBINSON, KYLE G receive 5.38 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 100% 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ROBINSON, KYLE G 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.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +27.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ROBINSON, KYLE G. This interview benefit is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 5.6% 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.
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.
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 20% 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.
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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 93% 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'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.
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.