Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18490466 | WHOLE-LIFE, MEDICATION MANAGEMENT, AND ORDERING DISPLAY SYSTEM | April 2024 | April 2025 | Abandon | 18 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18388366 | PLATFORM AND SYSTEM FOR USE IN THERAPEUTIC PROCEDURES | November 2023 | April 2025 | Allow | 17 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 18385363 | SYSTEMS FOR BIOMONITORING AND BLOOD GLUCOSE FORECASTING, AND ASSOCIATED METHODS | October 2023 | April 2025 | Abandon | 18 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18245965 | LEARNING APPARATUS, MENTAL STATE SEQUENCE PREDICTION APPARATUS, LEARNING METHOD, MENTAL STATE SEQUENCE PREDICTION METHOD AND PROGRAM | March 2023 | April 2025 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18123767 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MONITORING ADMINISTRATION OF NUTRITION | March 2023 | April 2025 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18113927 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GUIDING A PATIENT OR A CAREGIVER THEROF | February 2023 | April 2025 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18101873 | DATA COMMAND CENTER VISUAL DISPLAY SYSTEM | January 2023 | April 2025 | Allow | 27 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18066821 | SCALABLE RISK PREDICTION USING PRESCRIPTION DATA | December 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17922085 | PHARMACEUTICAL PROCESS | October 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17883354 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING AND DISPLAYING AN IMPLEMENTABLE TREATMENT PLAN BASED ON 2D INPUT IMAGES | August 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17833742 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MODIFYING A NUTRITION REQUIREMENT | June 2022 | July 2024 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17693421 | Individualized Dosing Technique With Multiple Variables | March 2022 | January 2025 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17666839 | Medical Intelligence System and Method | February 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17646446 | Self-Validating Module for Software Control of Medical Devices | December 2021 | June 2024 | Allow | 30 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17552014 | MEDICAL SUPPORT SYSTEM, INFORMATION TERMINAL APPARATUS AND PATIENT IMAGE DATA ACQUISITION METHOD | December 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17526656 | SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATIC GENERATING CUSTOMIZED MEDICAL INFORMATION | November 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 40 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17467517 | METHOD OF PROVIDING INFORMATION | September 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 40 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17467511 | METHOD, INFORMATION TERMINAL, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND METHOD OF PROVIDING INFORMATION | September 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 40 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17429151 | METHOD FOR SUPPORTING WORKFLOWS IN A LABORATORY ENVIRONMENT BY MEANS OF AN ASSISTANCE SYSTEM | August 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17416823 | System for Determining Treatment Decisions for Control of Blood Glucose | June 2021 | December 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17215971 | METHOD FOR FACILITY DATA COLLECTION AND INTERPRETATION | March 2021 | November 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17048210 | DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR STORING CLINICAL-SURGICAL DATA | October 2020 | November 2024 | Allow | 49 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16892158 | Methods of Predicting Disorder Progression for Control Arms Within an Experimental Trial | June 2020 | June 2024 | Allow | 49 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16689288 | AUTOMATED ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD (EMR) ANALYSIS VIA POINT OF CARE COMPUTING SYSTEMS | November 2019 | January 2025 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15556316 | METHODS AND SOFTWARE FOR PROVIDING HEALTH INFORMATION TO A USER EXPRESSING SYMPTOMS OF AN ALLERGIC REACTION VIA A WEARABLE DEVICE | September 2017 | May 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 9 | 0 | No | No |
| 14547119 | DISORDER TREATMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD | November 2014 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 10 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 13452215 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING FORM-GENERATED DATA | April 2012 | April 2013 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 13154730 | SYSTEM AND METHOD TO MEASURE AND MANAGE URGENT CARE REQUESTS | June 2011 | April 2013 | Allow | 22 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 13151057 | Method and Apparatus for Controlling An Infusion Pump or the Like | June 2011 | May 2017 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 12995470 | MEDICINE EXAMINATION SUPPORT SYSTEM | December 2010 | December 2012 | Allow | 24 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 12872758 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING A PRESCRIPTION | August 2010 | December 2013 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12852978 | COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR GROUPING MEDICAL CLAIMS BASED UPON CHANGES IN PATIENT CONDITION | August 2010 | November 2011 | Allow | 15 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12302336 | METHOD FOR THE INPUT OF A DESTINATION AND NAVIGATION DEVICE | March 2009 | June 2013 | Allow | 54 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 12332557 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING CURRENT INDUSTRY SPECIFIC DATA TO PHYSICIANS | December 2008 | August 2010 | Allow | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12290475 | ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AN UNDERSERVED POPULATION | October 2008 | December 2011 | Allow | 37 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12178608 | HEALTH CLINIC BROKER | July 2008 | May 2012 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12155662 | Information processing apparatus for movable body and vehicle navigation apparatus | June 2008 | February 2013 | Allow | 56 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11885342 | NAVIGATION SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE | May 2008 | January 2013 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12112165 | MANAGING THE BUSINESS OF A MEDICAL SCHEME | April 2008 | June 2013 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11969133 | ORDER SETS HAVING DIFFERENT VIEWS FOR CPOE SYSTEMS | January 2008 | November 2011 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11949407 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR GENERATING TOXICOLOGY REPORTS | December 2007 | September 2012 | Allow | 57 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 11857909 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISEASE MANAGEMENT ALGORITHM INTEGRATION | September 2007 | June 2012 | Allow | 57 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11856709 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COLLABORATIVE PATIENT CARE | September 2007 | September 2011 | Allow | 48 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11899208 | SYSTEM AND METHOD OF TREATING TEMPRO MANDIBULAR DISORDERS UTILIZING A PROTOCOL OF EXAMINATIONS, DIAGNOSTICS, PROCEDURES AND TREATMENTS TO GENERATE LETTERS, REPORTS AND CODED INSURANCE CLAIM FORMS TO MAXIMIZE BENEFIT PAYMENTS | September 2007 | November 2010 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11841439 | COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR GROUPING MEDICAL CLAIMS BASED UPON CHANGES IN PATIENT CONDITION | August 2007 | April 2010 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11754798 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MONITORING PATIENT CARE | May 2007 | December 2011 | Allow | 54 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 11567455 | PATIENT MONITORING VIA IMAGE CAPTURE | December 2006 | March 2011 | Allow | 52 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11604460 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING FORM-GENERATED DATA | November 2006 | December 2011 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11580325 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DELIVERY OF MEDICAL ITEMS ON AN ELECTRONIC PRESCRIPTION | October 2006 | January 2010 | Allow | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 11530374 | CLINICAL CARE UTILIZATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM | September 2006 | November 2010 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10660934 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR INTERFACING WITH A MULTI-LEVEL DATA STRUCTURE | September 2003 | October 2009 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10187424 | INTERACTIVE HEALTH INSURANCE SYSTEM | July 2002 | March 2010 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 10180732 | COMMUNICATION STATION AND SOFTWARE FOR INTERFACING WITH AN INFUSION PUMP, ANALYTE MONITOR, ANALYTE METER, OR THE LIKE | June 2002 | October 2009 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10136903 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR RECORDING CARIOUS LESIONS | May 2002 | October 2007 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10098700 | METHOD OF DELIVERING GOODS AND SERVICES VIA MEDIA | March 2002 | February 2011 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 1 | No | Yes |
| 09978221 | DISTANCE-TREATMENT THROUGH PUBLIC NETWORK | October 2001 | September 2009 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 09772394 | CLINICAL CARE UTILIZATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM | January 2001 | February 2010 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner COBANOGLU, DILEK B.
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, 27.3% 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.
⚠ 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 COBANOGLU, DILEK B works in Art Unit 3687 and has examined 57 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 68.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 42 months.
Examiner COBANOGLU, DILEK B's allowance rate of 68.4% places them in the 22% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by COBANOGLU, DILEK B receive 2.89 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 94% 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 COBANOGLU, DILEK B is 42 months. This places the examiner in the 5% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +36.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by COBANOGLU, DILEK B. This interview benefit is in the 87% 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, 26.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 33% 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.
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 request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 50.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 43% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show below-average success with this examiner. Consider whether your arguments are strong enough to warrant a PAC request.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 80.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 70% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 37.5% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 30.8% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 23% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are rarely granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing a petition, as the Technology Center Director typically upholds this examiner's decisions.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 21.1% of allowed cases (in the 99% 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.
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.