Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18928746 | CROSS-SERVICE TRANSACTIONS FOR PEER-TO-PEER (P2P) PAYMENT PLATFORMS | October 2024 | November 2025 | Allow | 13 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 18540430 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENHANCED ELECTRONIC NETWORKED SETTLEMENT PROCESSOR | December 2023 | April 2024 | Allow | 4 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 18506233 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR COMMODITY ANTI-COUNTERFEITING AND TRACING BASED ON BLOCKCHAIN AND ELASTIC COMPUTE SERVICE | November 2023 | September 2025 | Abandon | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18503847 | BLOCKCHAIN SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING SUSTAINABILITY AND/OR HEALTH RELATED PROVENANCE OF PRODUCTS | November 2023 | January 2026 | Abandon | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18487084 | Secure Peer-to-Peer Payment Platform with Escrow and Dispute Resolution | October 2023 | June 2025 | Abandon | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18555051 | A CRYPTOCURRENCY-BASED AND COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED TRANSACTION METHOD FOR ONLINE SERVICES AND AN ASSOCIATED NETWORK-COMPATIBLE DEVICE | October 2023 | August 2025 | Abandon | 22 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18370580 | ATHLETE NAME, IMAGE, AND LIKENESS MARKETING AND DIRECT PAYMENT SYSTEM | September 2023 | December 2025 | Abandon | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18229911 | DYNAMICALLY LINKING MACHINE-READABLE CODES TO DIGITAL ACCOUNTS FOR LOADING OF APPLICATION DATA | August 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 31 | 3 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 18356819 | LIFESTYLE HARDSHIP WAIVER PROTECTING DUES AGAINST LIFESTYLE HARDSHIPS | July 2023 | July 2025 | Abandon | 24 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18200330 | METHOD TO ENABLE PARALLELIZATION AND INTEGRATION OF MICROSERVICES TO A HIGHLY PERFORMANT MONOLITH STRUCTURE | May 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 29 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18144823 | REAL-TIME INTERBANK TRANSACTIONS SYSTEMS AND METHODS | May 2023 | October 2025 | Abandon | 29 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 18186766 | TRANSACTION CONTROL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, APPARATUS, AND METHOD | March 2023 | June 2025 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18165953 | TRANSACTION SYSTEM, TRANSACTION METHOD, DEVICE, AND PROGRAM | February 2023 | August 2025 | Abandon | 30 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17720853 | BLOCKCHAIN-BASED RESOURCE TRANSFER METHOD, APPARATUS, NODE DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | April 2022 | April 2025 | Abandon | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17696676 | Systems, Methods and Computer Program Products for Secure Contactless Payment Transactions | March 2022 | December 2024 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17690282 | COMPUTER SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CALCULATING PAYMENT AMOUNT | March 2022 | March 2026 | Abandon | 48 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16751322 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR OFFERING VALUE-ADDED SERVICES ON TRANSACTIONS | January 2020 | November 2024 | Abandon | 57 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner GART, MATTHEW S.
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 GART, MATTHEW S works in Art Unit 3696 and has examined 1 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 57 months.
Examiner GART, MATTHEW S'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 GART, MATTHEW S receive 4.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 97% 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 GART, MATTHEW S is 57 months. This places the examiner in the 2% 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, 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.
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.