USPTO Examiner DONAHUE ZACHARY RYAN - Art Unit 3689

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18612743FACTORING SYSTEM AND METHODMarch 2024March 2026Abandon2410NoNo
18402199Method and System for Choosing Prosthetics Through Cross-Reference of DatabasesJanuary 2024February 2026Abandon2510NoNo
18550636SYSTEM, METHOD AND INTERFACE FOR GENERATING OR MODIFYING GARMENT PATTERNSSeptember 2023December 2025Abandon2710NoNo
18273107INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, UNPROFITABLE PRODUCT DETERMINATION ASSISTANCE METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUMJuly 2023November 2025Abandon2820YesNo
17726297MACHINE-LEARNING RECOMMENDATION SYSTEM BASED ON GAME THEORYApril 2022December 2025Abandon4430YesNo
17710852SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUGMENTED AND VIRTUAL RETAIL EXPERIENCESMarch 2022January 2026Allow4520NoYes
17652973SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PRODUCT RETRIEVALMarch 2022November 2025Abandon4440YesNo
17631467Interface for Matching a Racquet Sports Player and a Racquet StringerJanuary 2022December 2024Abandon3540NoNo
17569155RETAIL STORE PRODUCTS INFORMATION DISPLAY OVERLAYJanuary 2022December 2025Abandon4720YesNo
17608413METHOD FOR PROVIDING CLOTHING FITTING SERVICE BY USING 3D AVATAR, AND SYSTEM THEREFORNovember 2021November 2025Abandon4841YesNo
17458116DRIVING COMPUTER DISPLAYS WITH CUSTOMIZATION OPTIONS AND COLLECTING CUSTOMIZATION SPECIFICATIONSAugust 2021January 2026Abandon5350YesNo
17384012EQUITABLE TICKET EXCHANGE AMONG TICKET HOLDERSJuly 2021November 2025Abandon5240NoYes
17359915QUERY-BASED PRODUCT REPRESENTATIONSJune 2021March 2026Abandon5650YesNo
17230257ESTIMATING PRODUCT ATTRIBUTE PREFERENCESApril 2021October 2025Abandon5540YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
18.3%
Lower than average

What This Means

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.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
10.1%
Lower than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

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.

Strategic Recommendations

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 DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN works in Art Unit 3689 and has examined 5 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 0.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN's allowance rate of 0.0% places them in the 1% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN receive 4.40 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 98% 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN 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.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by DONAHUE, ZACHARY RYAN. This interview benefit is in the 16% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 0.0% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

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.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

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.