Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18775752 | GAMING PLATFORM ARCHITECTURE | July 2024 | May 2025 | Allow | 10 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18659968 | METHOD AND SYSTEM OF MINING BLOCKCHAIN TRANSACTIONS PROVIDED BY A VALIDATOR NODE | May 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18651040 | High-throughput, low-latency transaction processing | April 2024 | September 2025 | Allow | 17 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18648290 | A NON-TRANSITORY MACHINE-READABLE MEDIUM, COMPUTING DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR GENERATING VISUALIZATION | April 2024 | January 2026 | Abandon | 20 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18600508 | Systems and Methods for Implementing Blockchain-Based Content Engagement Platforms Utilizing Media Wallets | March 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18578512 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DETERMINING TRANSFER INFORMATION IN MESSAGE THROUGH NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING BASED ON DEEP LEARNING | January 2024 | October 2024 | Allow | 9 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18512926 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PRIVATE NETWORK ISSUANCE OF DIGITAL CURRENCY | November 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18510132 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONDITIONALLY GIFTING FUNDS | November 2023 | October 2025 | Abandon | 23 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18235129 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MAINTAINING ANONYMITY IN A GAMING OR OTHER ENVIRONMENT | August 2023 | January 2025 | Abandon | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18217526 | CARBON NEUTRAL BLOCKCHAIN PROTOCOL FOR RESOLVING CARBON OFFSETTER PAYMENTS FOR CRYPTOCURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | June 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18268458 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONNECTING, MANAGING OR TRANSFERRING NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENS | June 2023 | November 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 18327391 | VIRTUAL CREDENTIAL AUTHENTICATION BASED ON BROWSING CONTEXT | June 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 27 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18201665 | RECONCILIATION IN THE AUTOMATED DISTRIBUTION OF GRATUITIES | May 2023 | December 2025 | Abandon | 31 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18322021 | ECONOMIC OPTIMIZATION FOR PRODUCT SEARCH RELEVANCY | May 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 34 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18197520 | INTEGRATED UTILITY DISTRIBUTION AND AUTOMATED BILLING | May 2023 | October 2024 | Allow | 17 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18197226 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FACILITATING ELECTRONIC FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS DURING A COMMUNICATION SESSION | May 2023 | February 2025 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18196646 | ULTRA-WIDEBAND-ENABLED DEVICES AND SYSTEMS | May 2023 | August 2024 | Allow | 15 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18141856 | GROUP DATA OBJECTS AND ASSOCIATED FUNCTIONALITY ENABLEMENT | May 2023 | July 2025 | Allow | 27 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18245979 | INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM | March 2023 | October 2025 | Abandon | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18111206 | Extended Reality Methods and Systems for Processing Vehicle-Related Information | February 2023 | September 2025 | Allow | 31 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18169946 | INFERRING AND/OR PREDICTING RELATIONSHIP RULES | February 2023 | June 2025 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18162846 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING INSURANCE | February 2023 | May 2025 | Abandon | 28 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18077544 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PAYMENT TERMINAL OPTIMIZATION | December 2022 | October 2024 | Allow | 22 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18050167 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GEOGRAPHIC AREA-BASED AUTOMATED ADVISING | October 2022 | March 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18049144 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TOKENIZATION, MANAGEMENT, TRADING, SETTLEMENT, AND RETIREMENT OF RENEWABLE ENERGY ATTRIBUTES | October 2022 | October 2025 | Abandon | 35 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17966224 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND STORAGE MEDIUM | October 2022 | December 2024 | Abandon | 26 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17961501 | VIRTUAL-TO-PHYSICAL SECURE REMOTE PAYMENT TO A PHYSICAL LOCATION | October 2022 | February 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17953199 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VERIFYING DIGITAL PAYMENTS | September 2022 | October 2024 | Abandon | 25 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17945283 | BANKING AT AN ATM USING A MOBILE DEVICE | September 2022 | May 2025 | Allow | 32 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17851514 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ACCOUNTS WITH MULTIPLE PROFILES | June 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17843059 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIGITAL PAYMENTS USING BLOCKCHAIN WITH CUSTOMER KEYS | June 2022 | August 2024 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17723108 | AUTOMATED DISTRIBUTION OF GRATUITIES | April 2022 | October 2025 | Abandon | 41 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17586466 | CREATING A SMART CONTRACT ON A BLOCKCHAIN LEDGER | January 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 39 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17557452 | SPORTING EVENT WAGERING WITH INSURANCE | December 2021 | November 2025 | Abandon | 47 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 17449040 | SECURITY HIERARCHY ON A DIGITAL TRANSACTION PROCESSING UNIT (DTPU) | September 2021 | August 2024 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 13106474 | CONFIGURATION PRICING STRATEGIES FOR MULTI-COMMODITY REQUEST-FOR-QUOTES | May 2011 | August 2012 | Allow | 16 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 12782896 | METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR VIRTUAL TRADING OF SECURITIES | May 2010 | November 2010 | Allow | 6 | 0 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 12352598 | IMAGE-BASED PAYMENT MEDIUM | January 2009 | April 2012 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 12107418 | ONLINE LIFE INSURANCE DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICE | April 2008 | September 2010 | Allow | 29 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11887107 | MESSAGE CHARACTER STRING OUTPUT SYSTEM, ITS CONTROL METHOD, AND INFORMATION STORAGE MEDIUM | September 2007 | September 2011 | Allow | 48 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11689256 | AUTOMATED REAL-TIME SECURE USER DATA SOURCING | March 2007 | July 2011 | Allow | 52 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11332669 | PASS THROUGH LIQUIDITY IN A MULTI-TIERED TRADING SYSTEM AND METHOD | January 2006 | July 2010 | Allow | 54 | 1 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 11227545 | BUDGET-DEPENDENT PSEUDO BID IN AUCTION | September 2005 | February 2010 | Allow | 53 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 10123267 | METHOD OF AND SYSTEM FOR AUCTIONING OFF COMMERCIAL FRAMES FOR ON-AIR CONTENT AND METHOD OF AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATICALLY SENDING ON-AIR CONTENT | April 2002 | May 2009 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 10094193 | METHOD AND DATA STRUCTURE FOR PARTICIPATION IN MULTIPLE NEGOTIATIONS | March 2002 | June 2008 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 10013826 | METHODS OF COORDINATING PRODUCTS AND SERVICE DEMONSTRATIONS | December 2001 | September 2008 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 09987667 | MEDIATION SERVICE METHOD FOR COLLECTING AND SELLING PIECES OF SELLING PRICE INFORMATION THAT MATCHES A REQUEST | November 2001 | October 2008 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 09999267 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING AND BILLING INTERNET SERVICES | October 2001 | September 2008 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 09965071 | COMPUTER-BASED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SEARCHING AND SCREENING FINANCIAL SECURITIES AND RELEVANT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY | September 2001 | June 2010 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 09903075 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SELECTING AN OPTIMAL AUCTION FORMAT | July 2001 | September 2009 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HAMILTON, SARA CHANDLER.
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, 42.9% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.
⚠ Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner HAMILTON, SARA CHANDLER works in Art Unit 3695 and has examined 17 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 94.1%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.
Examiner HAMILTON, SARA CHANDLER's allowance rate of 94.1% places them in the 82% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by HAMILTON, SARA CHANDLER receive 2.47 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 72% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by HAMILTON, SARA CHANDLER 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.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +20.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HAMILTON, SARA CHANDLER. This interview benefit is in the 64% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 29.4% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 56% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 40.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 61% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.
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 85.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 79% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 7% 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 58.8% of allowed cases (in the 100% 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 44% 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.