Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18939143 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REGULATING PROVISION OF MESSAGES WITH CONTENT FROM DISPARATE SOURCES BASED ON RISK AND FEEDBACK DATA | November 2024 | April 2025 | Allow | 5 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18750013 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REGULATING PROVISION OF MESSAGES WITH CONTENT FROM DISPARATE SOURCES BASED ON RISK AND FEEDBACK DATA | June 2024 | January 2025 | Allow | 7 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18543670 | MACHINE LEARNING SYSTEM FOR GENERATING PREDICTIONS ACCORDING TO VARIED ATTRIBUTES | December 2023 | December 2024 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18540563 | TECHNOLOGY TO AUTOMATICALLY IDENTIFY THE MOST RELEVANT HEALTH FAILURE RISK FACTORS | December 2023 | February 2025 | Allow | 14 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18382228 | AUTOMATED HEALTH CONDITION SCORING IN TELEHEALTH ENCOUNTERS | October 2023 | March 2025 | Abandon | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18344269 | PROGRAMMATICALLY MANAGING SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH TO PROVIDE ELECTRONIC DATA LINKS WITH THIRD PARTY HEALTH RESOURCES | June 2023 | March 2025 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18210531 | Intelligent Patient Monitor Mount | June 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18128563 | System and Method For Evaluating, Monitoring, Assessing and Predicting Ambient and Health Conditions | March 2023 | April 2025 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18174556 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BIOMETRIC AND PSYCHOMETRIC BASED CONTENT DISPLAY | February 2023 | April 2025 | Abandon | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18172160 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AT-HOME TESTING, TREATMENT, AND MONITORING | February 2023 | October 2024 | Abandon | 20 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 18100175 | METHOD AND AN APPARATUS FOR BUILDING A LONGEVITY PROFILE | January 2023 | July 2024 | Allow | 17 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18151396 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROCESSING GLUCOSE DATA | January 2023 | February 2025 | Abandon | 26 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17914738 | METHOD FOR PROVIDING BASIC DATA FOR DIAGNOSIS, AND SYSTEM THEREFOR | September 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17914727 | METHOD FOR PREDICTING DEVELOPMENTAL DISEASE AND SYSTEM THEREFOR | September 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17745840 | ORDER MANAGEMENT METHOD AND PROGRAM, ORDER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AND DATABASE FOR MEDICAL PRACTICES | May 2022 | February 2025 | Abandon | 33 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17745866 | System and Method for Improved Medical Contact Center | May 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 35 | 0 | 1 | No | No |
| 17737834 | PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOLOGICAL AGENT DELIVERY SYSTEM HAVING BIOMETRIC DATA ACQUISITION AND MONITORING CAPABILITIES | May 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17712346 | TARGETED MEDICAL INTERVENTION SYSTEM | April 2022 | May 2025 | Abandon | 37 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17674805 | SMART BARCODE ID FOR INTEROPERABLE PUMPS | February 2022 | February 2025 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17648249 | METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR GENERATING A PROVIDER REFERRAL RECOMMENDATION BASED ON A MULTI-FACTOR REFERRAL SUCCESS METRIC | January 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 38 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17548969 | TRANSFER LEARNING TECHNIQUES FOR USING PREDICTIVE DIAGNOSIS MACHINE LEARNING MODELS TO GENERATE TELEHEALTH VISIT RECOMMENDATION SCORES | December 2021 | May 2025 | Allow | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17433838 | CARE ASSISTANCE DEVICE, CARE ASSISTANCE METHOD, AND CARE ASSISTANCE SYSTEM | August 2021 | January 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17431371 | SUMMARIAL SCORES FOR AN EMR PLATFORM | August 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 43 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17444565 | OPHTHALMIC EXAMINATION SUPPORT SYSTEM | August 2021 | April 2025 | Abandon | 44 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17245915 | INTERACTIVE MULTI-FACTOR PHYSICIAN SIGNATURE SYSTEM | April 2021 | November 2024 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 17227225 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING AND VISUALIZING MEDICAL DEVICE RESOURCE AVAILABILITY | April 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 46 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17247865 | OPTIMIZATION OF AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES FOR SHARED-HEALTH EVENTS | December 2020 | February 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17247307 | REVENUE MODEL FOR HEALTHCARE NETWORKS | December 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17247037 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR IDENTIFICATION AND PREDICTION OF VIRUS INFECTIVITY | November 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17033379 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MATCHING MEDICAL RECORDS FOR PATIENTS ACROSS DISPARATE MEDICAL PROVIDERS TO FACILITATE CONTINUITY OF CARE | September 2020 | December 2023 | Abandon | 38 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17024101 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, MEDICAL IMAGING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM | September 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16947763 | PATIENT LOAD MANAGEMENT FOR HEALTHCARE NETWORKS | August 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 53 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16607740 | CLINICAL REPORT WITH AN ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATION | October 2019 | January 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 15320754 | SYSTEM FOR ASSESSING GLOBAL WELLNESS | December 2016 | December 2020 | Abandon | 48 | 6 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ELSHAER, ALAAELDIN M.
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 ELSHAER, ALAAELDIN M works in Art Unit 3687 and has examined 32 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 21.9%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.
Examiner ELSHAER, ALAAELDIN M's allowance rate of 21.9% 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 ELSHAER, ALAAELDIN M receive 2.69 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 90% 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 ELSHAER, ALAAELDIN M is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 15% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +34.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ELSHAER, ALAAELDIN M. This interview benefit is in the 85% 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, 10.5% 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 1% 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 18% 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 1% 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, 85.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 94% 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.