Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18760129 | HANDHELD PERSONAL DEVICE FOR PROVIDING CUSTOMIZED CONTENT BY A VIRTUAL DOCENT | July 2024 | March 2025 | Abandon | 9 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18145091 | PROCESSING MESSAGES FOR VALUE EXTRACTION | December 2022 | July 2024 | Allow | 19 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17794303 | RESOURCE ALLOCATION METHOD AND APPARATUS AND STORAGE MEDIUM | July 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 32 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17728897 | DEMENTIA PATIENT INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM | April 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 35 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17708353 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATED IDENTIFICATION OF TARGET POPULATIONS FOR SYSTEM INITIATION | March 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17702785 | METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR INTEGRATED HEALTHCARE ECOSYSTEM | March 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17699276 | PLATFORM AND INTERFACES FOR MANAGING CAREGIVERS | March 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17491962 | SOCIAL MEDIA INTERFACE | October 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 17448853 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING IN-GAME OFFERS | September 2021 | November 2024 | Abandon | 38 | 6 | 0 | No | No |
| 17287675 | REINFORCEMENT LEARNING SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INVENTORY CONTROL AND OPTIMIZATION | April 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17095935 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION STORAGE MEDIUM | November 2020 | April 2025 | Abandon | 53 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16991709 | Advertisement Metric Prediction | August 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 48 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16663859 | Personal Taste Assessment Method and System | October 2019 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16165456 | METHODS AND TOOLS FOR A/B TESTING LOGIC ON EMAILS | October 2018 | January 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 14717091 | CONTENT PRESENTATION BASED ON ACCESS POINT LOCATION | May 2015 | June 2024 | Allow | 60 | 9 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner TSUI, ALFRED H.
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.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner TSUI, ALFRED H works in Art Unit 3685 and has examined 14 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 21.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.
Examiner TSUI, ALFRED H's allowance rate of 21.4% places them in the 1% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by TSUI, ALFRED H receive 3.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 99% 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 TSUI, ALFRED H 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.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +60.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by TSUI, ALFRED H. This interview benefit is in the 97% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 7.1% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 1% 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 14.3% 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.
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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 36% 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 37% 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.