Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18425128 | QUEUE MANAGEMENT DEVICE FOR PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT ACCESS WAITING SCREEN AND METHOD THEREOF | January 2024 | January 2026 | Allow | 23 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18544478 | INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD | December 2023 | February 2026 | Abandon | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18525398 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR VISION-BASED EVENT DETECTION | November 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18488765 | Barmaster Drink Delivery System | October 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 27 | 4 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 18374193 | Remote SKU On-Boarding of Products for Subsequent Video Identification and Sale | September 2023 | October 2024 | Abandon | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18373175 | CONCURRENT VISUALIZATION TOOL USING AUGMENTED REALITY TO IMPROVE DECISION MAKING | September 2023 | June 2025 | Abandon | 20 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18462370 | SYSTEM, NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA, AND METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC THIRD-PARTY NEGOTIATION AUTOMATION SYSTEM AND TOOL | September 2023 | December 2024 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18235018 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING VISUALLY SIMILAR ITEMS | August 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 27 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18207612 | METHOD AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR MODELS BASED ON DATA AUGMENTED WITH CONCEIVABLE TRANSITIONS | June 2023 | February 2025 | Allow | 20 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 18318272 | DETERMINING AND PRESENTING INFORMATION RELATED TO A SEMANTIC CONTEXT OF ELECTRONIC MESSAGE TEXT OR VOICE DATA | May 2023 | March 2026 | Abandon | 34 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18133669 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENSURING THAT ALLERGENS ARE NOT CONTAINED IN FOOD ORDERS PLACED WITH RESTAURANTS VIA MOBILE DEVICES | April 2023 | September 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18190945 | SYSTEM, METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA FOR OBTAINING USER PARAMETERS OF E-COMMERCE USERS TO AUTO COMPLETE CHECKOUT FORMS | March 2023 | December 2024 | Allow | 21 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18183065 | ITEM RESOLUTION SERVICE | March 2023 | September 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18118726 | LOGISTICS WAREHOUSE OPERATING SYSTEM FOR SELLER | March 2023 | September 2025 | Abandon | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18118724 | LOGISTICS WAREHOUSE OPERATING SYSTEM FOR BUYER | March 2023 | November 2025 | Abandon | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18067169 | ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENT BASED SYSTEM FOR CUSTOMER RECOMMENDATION AND NOTIFICATION AND ITS PROCESS THEREOF | December 2022 | December 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18062947 | RETAIL STORE MOTION SENSOR METHODS | December 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 18049801 | EXCEPTIONS REMEDIATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ASSET TRANSFER | October 2022 | June 2025 | Abandon | 32 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17796679 | PROGRAM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE | September 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17905585 | MULTI-INSTANCE, MULTI-USER ORDERING METHOD AND SYSTEM | September 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17895132 | BIDDER BUYER POOL SYSTEM | August 2022 | January 2025 | Abandon | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17890925 | Method and System for Energy Transaction Platform | August 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17881596 | AUGMENTED REALITY PRODUCT PRESENTATION SYSTEM | August 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17868921 | Item-Based Payment Processing System | July 2022 | January 2026 | Abandon | 42 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17811210 | Recommendation Filtering | July 2022 | November 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17811083 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING AN EDGE QUEUING PLATFORM | July 2022 | January 2026 | Allow | 42 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17736187 | SHIPPING OPTION RECOMMENDATION AND MANAGEMENT | May 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 46 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17706233 | NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM AND SYSTEM PERFORMING SPECIFIC PROCESS WHICH ENABLES PAYMENT OF CHARGE OF ARTICLE | March 2022 | October 2025 | Allow | 43 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17684513 | DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INITIATING REMEDIAL ACTIONS BASED ON ALTERED PROVIDER OBJECTS | March 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17676241 | System and method for toll bidding | February 2022 | June 2024 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17592386 | CONTEXTUALLY AWARE CUSTOMER ITEM ENTRY FOR AUTONOMOUS SHOPPING APPLICATIONS | February 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 32 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17543921 | MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY INFORMATION RECORDING MEDIUM | December 2021 | January 2026 | Abandon | 50 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17474553 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM | September 2021 | November 2024 | Abandon | 38 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17445897 | CONFIGURING AN ASSOCIATION BETWEEN OBJECTS BASED ON AN IDENTIFICATION OF A STYLE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OBJECTS | August 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 50 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17365769 | AUTOMATIC DISTRIBUTION OF DIGITAL WISH LISTS CONTENT BASED ON USER SET THRESHOLDS | July 2021 | August 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17204023 | RENTAL VEHICLE SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION | March 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 56 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17204377 | RENTAL VEHICLE SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION | March 2021 | January 2026 | Abandon | 58 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17204386 | RENTAL VEHICLE SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION | March 2021 | August 2025 | Abandon | 53 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17129534 | SYSTEMS, NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUMS, AND METHODS FOR IMPROVED VEHICLE TRANSACTION PLATFORMS | December 2020 | February 2026 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17126774 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONNECTING AND FACILITATING THE MACHINE-TO-MACHINE DELIVERY OF A GIFT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE MONETARY VALUE | December 2020 | June 2025 | Allow | 54 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16836305 | DETERMINING USER SPENDING PROPENSITIES FOR SMART RECOMMENDATIONS | March 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 54 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16675606 | MACHINE LEARNING PREDICTIONS OF RECOMMENDED PRODUCTS IN AUGMENTED REALITY ENVIRONMENTS | November 2019 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16128384 | USER DEVICE TRIGGERED, IN-STORE, ORDER PICKUP | September 2018 | December 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 5 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 15828420 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS OF DISCOVERY OF PRODUCTS IN E-COMMERCE | November 2017 | March 2020 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 14831785 | METHODS, APPARATUS AND ARTICLES OF MANUFACTURE FOR A RING ADVISOR SYSTEM | August 2015 | April 2019 | Allow | 44 | 2 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 14660322 | VIRTUALIZED PRODUCT EVALUATION AND COMPARISON | March 2015 | January 2019 | Allow | 46 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner RAMPHAL, LATASHA DEVI.
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 RAMPHAL, LATASHA DEVI works in Art Unit 3688 and has examined 15 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 33.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.
Examiner RAMPHAL, LATASHA DEVI's allowance rate of 33.3% places them in the 5% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by RAMPHAL, LATASHA DEVI receive 3.80 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 96% 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 RAMPHAL, LATASHA DEVI is 53 months. This places the examiner in the 3% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 11.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 6% 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 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 20% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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.
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.