Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18597915 | VERTICAL WALL CONSTRUCTION METHOD AND CONSTRUCTION ROBOT | March 2024 | February 2026 | Abandon | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18436737 | CARGO HANDLING MANAGEMENT DEVICE, IN-VEHICLE TERMINAL DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAM | February 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18406999 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING A VARIABLE CAMBER FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM OF AN AIRCRAFT IN A CRUISE FLIGHT PHASE | January 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18390200 | System for Guiding an Operator When Compacting Concrete | December 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 24 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18537326 | DETERMINING VEHICLE ROUTE MAPS AND ROUTES | December 2023 | December 2025 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18378331 | FRAUD DETERRENCE FOR SECURE TRANSACTIONS | October 2023 | January 2025 | Abandon | 15 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18373384 | Blockchain Digital Cryptocurrency Loan System | September 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 30 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18236738 | Systems and Methods to Facilitate Increased Building of Carbon Removal and Carbon Capture Infrastructures | August 2023 | February 2025 | Abandon | 18 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 18060911 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENHANCED COMPUTER LOGIC PROCESSING OF MORTGAGE LOAN ORIGINATIONS | December 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17908100 | ELECTRONIC PAYMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD SUITABLE FOR OTT ENVIRONMENT | August 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 25 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17884075 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR USING LOCATION DATA TO GENERATE AND MODIFY PURCHASE INCENTIVES | August 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17847443 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, A METHOD, AND A NONVOLATILE STORAGE MEDIUM | June 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 27 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17727268 | METHOD, SYSTEM, AND APPARATUS FOR MULTIPLE LOAN RETRIEVAL AND SIMULTANEOS PRESENTATION | April 2022 | November 2024 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17667102 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR USING LOCATION DATA TO GENERATE AND MODIFY PURCHASE INCENTIVES | February 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 33 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17486368 | DATA STRUCTURES FOR TRANSFER AND PROCESSING OF FINANCIAL DATA | September 2021 | October 2024 | Abandon | 37 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17484890 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR FORECASTING AND ADJUSTING STEADY RECURRING TRANSACTIONS THAT ARE SOFT/HARD - COMMITTED WITH COMPUTATION AND USER FEEDBACK | September 2021 | March 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17471950 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR WORD-OF-MOUTH ADVERTISING | September 2021 | February 2025 | Abandon | 42 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 14625116 | Electronically Blocking Creation of New Insurance Policies at an Electronic Insurance Management System | February 2015 | February 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 10 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ANDERSON, MICHAEL W.
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 ANDERSON, MICHAEL W works in Art Unit 3693 and has examined 4 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 42 months.
Examiner ANDERSON, MICHAEL W'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.
On average, applications examined by ANDERSON, MICHAEL W receive 4.25 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ANDERSON, MICHAEL W is 42 months. This places the examiner in the 19% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ANDERSON, MICHAEL W. 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.
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.
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 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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 41% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments less often than average. You may need to make most claim amendments yourself.
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.