USPTO Examiner ZELASKIEWICZ CHRYSTINA E - Art Unit 3699

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18618821SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ACCOUNT VERIFICATIONMarch 2024January 2026Allow2220YesNo
18595860SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REAL-TIME CLASSIFICATION AND VERIFICATION OF DATA USING HIERARCHAL STATE MACHINESMarch 2024January 2026Allow2310YesNo
18397831METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SCANNABLE NON-FUNGIBLE TOKEN GENERATIONDecember 2023February 2026Abandon2630YesNo
18342440SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TOKENIZING INFORMATION FROM A DIGITAL WALLET HOST BY AN ACQUIRER PROCESSORJune 2023September 2025Allow2630YesNo
18334839SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING CRYPTOGRAPHICALLY SECURED DIGITAL ASSETSJune 2023November 2025Allow2920YesNo
18317493ADJUSTING WEIGHTS OF WEIGHTED CONSENSUS ALGORITHMS FOR BLOCKCHAINSMay 2023October 2025Abandon2940YesNo
18138114Systems And Methods Of Facilitating Merchant Coupon Distribution On A Blockchain NetworkApril 2023September 2025Abandon2910NoNo
18126697METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MASTERCARD AUTHENTICATING NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENSMarch 2023January 2026Allow3420YesNo
18124823SYSTEM AND METHOD OF BLOCKCHAIN TRANSACTIONSMarch 2023September 2025Abandon3010NoNo
18181240Processing data interactions performed by an Internet of Things (IoT) deviceMarch 2023February 2026Allow3640YesNo
18173237Digital Access CodeFebruary 2023January 2026Allow3560YesNo
18164704SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR UNIFIED USER EXPERIENCE WITH SINGLE SCREEN USER INTERFACEFebruary 2023January 2026Abandon3520YesNo
18160027EMPLOYEE PROFILE FOR CUSTOMER ASSIGNMENT, ANALYTICS AND PAYMENTSJanuary 2023November 2025Abandon3440NoNo
18093015DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM TO ENABLE DYNAMIC, ON-DEMAND SALES FORCE WITH MERCHANT, SELLER AND BUYER NETWORKEDJanuary 2023January 2026Abandon3650NoNo
18050545PROTECTION AGAINST FRONT-RUNNING ATTACKS IN CRYPTOGRAPHIC TOKEN SYSTEMOctober 2022April 2025Abandon3001NoNo
17781941A SYSTEM FOR DIGITAL ASSET EXCHANGE, A DIGITAL WALLET AND AN ARCHITECTURE FOR EXCHANGING DIGITAL ASSETSOctober 2022January 2026Abandon4321YesNo
17955100NETWORK-AGNOSTIC SYSTEM TO FACILITATE PEER-TO-PEER TRANSFERSSeptember 2022February 2025Abandon2910NoNo
17934254SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATING A NON-FUNGIBLE TOKEN ASSOCIATED TO AN ITEMSeptember 2022September 2025Abandon3620NoNo
17932460Blockchain-Enabled Non-Fungible Token (NFT) Application in Public TransitSeptember 2022September 2025Abandon3620YesNo
17930200SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTITY-PROTECTED DATA ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION NETWORKSeptember 2022September 2024Allow2440YesNo
17876658CRYPTOCURRENCY CARD WITH CUSTOMIZABLE WALLET ASSIGNMENTJuly 2022January 2026Abandon4240YesNo
17876140METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PAYMENT PROCESSING USING DISTRIBUTED DIGITIZED SURROGATESJuly 2022May 2025Allow3330YesNo
17814193APPARATUS AND METHOD TO FACILITATE TRANSFER OF CONSIDERATION BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS IN A COMMON GEOLOCATIONJuly 2022March 2025Abandon3130NoNo
17867343SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING TRANSFER AND ACCESS RESTRICTIONS ON ELECTRONIC DIGITAL RESOURCESJuly 2022November 2025Abandon4030NoNo
17751372SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TARGETED ADVERTISINGMay 2022March 2026Abandon4650NoNo
17739034NFT DIGITAL FRAMEMay 2022November 2024Abandon3110NoNo
17738596FRAUD DETECTION FOR PRE-DECLINING CARD TRANSACTIONSMay 2022October 2025Abandon4220YesNo
17727957DYNAMIC SELECTION OF ADVERTISEMENTS USING DEEP LEARNING MODELS ON CLIENT DEVICESApril 2022September 2024Allow2820YesNo
17659093SUPERVISED AND/OR UNSUPERVISED MACHINE LEARNING MODELS FOR SUPPLEMENTING RECORDS STORED IN A DATABASE FOR RETRIEVALApril 2022March 2026Abandon4720YesNo
17712152MULTI-CHAIN CREDENTIAL MANAGEMENT AND RETRIEVAL OF LOST CREDENTIALApril 2022April 2025Abandon3720NoNo
17634945AUTHORIZATION DEVICEFebruary 2022May 2025Abandon4030YesNo
17615096INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING PROGRAMNovember 2021January 2026Abandon4950YesNo
17522398SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING ON-FILE PAYMENT CREDENTIALSNovember 2021November 2025Abandon4940YesNo
17484506CONTROL METHOD, SERVER, AND RECORDING MEDIUMSeptember 2021September 2025Abandon4840YesNo
17439976CREDIT ANALYSIS ASSISTANCE METHOD, CREDIT ANALYSIS ASSISTANCE SYSTEM, AND NODESeptember 2021May 2025Abandon4440NoNo
17309625TWO-DIMENSIONAL CODE TRANSACTION PROCESSING COMMON GATEWAYJune 2021December 2025Allow5450YesNo
17294053POST-TRANSACTION TIPPING WITH MODIFIED TRANSACTION MESSAGE FIELDSMay 2021March 2026Abandon5860NoNo
17160337SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING AND RECTIFYING ABNORMAL AD SPENDSJanuary 2021September 2025Abandon5560YesNo
17135569ESCROW NON-FACE-TO-FACE CRYPTOCURRENCY TRANSACTION DEVICE AND METHOD USING PHONE NUMBERDecember 2020September 2025Abandon5640YesNo
17001457SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR OBFUSCATING TRANSACTIONSAugust 2020August 2024Allow4831YesNo
16963349MANAGING A SMART CONTRACT IN REAL-TIMEJuly 2020February 2026Abandon6060NoNo
16922804METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND APPARATUS FOR ENHANCING ELECTRONIC COMMERCE USING SOCIAL MEDIAJuly 2020January 2025Abandon5460YesYes
16847502DYNAMICALLY CHANGING DISPLAY ON FOR-HIRE VEHICLESApril 2020October 2025Abandon6051YesNo
16845156SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING A MARKET DATA HUB VIA DISTRIBUTED LEDGER TECHNOLOGYApril 2020December 2024Allow5760YesNo
12536874ANONYMOUS SEPARATION OF DUTIES WITH CREDENTIALSAugust 2009November 2013Allow5140YesNo
12473252METHOD FOR FINGERPRINTING AND IDENTIFYING INTERNET USERSMay 2009December 2011Allow3020YesNo
12184036METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR VERIFYING ELECTION RESULTSJuly 2008October 2011Allow3910YesNo
11585734LICENSE DISTRIBUTIONOctober 2006May 2009Allow3120YesNo
11412585ENABLING A SOFTWARE SERVICE PROVIDER TO AUTOMATICALLY OBTAIN SOFTWARE SERVICEApril 2006January 2011Allow5720NoNo
11259677DIGITAL APPLICATION OPERATING ACCORDING TO AGGREGATION OF PLURALITY OF LICENSESOctober 2005April 2010Allow5440YesNo
11227027METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR METERING USAGE OF SOFTWARE PRODUCTS WITH AUTOMATIC CATALOG POPULATIONSeptember 2005December 2010Allow6030NoYes
11216169METHOD OF CONTROLLING STORAGE SYSTEMSeptember 2005June 2010Allow5731NoNo
10982578SPECIFIYING SECURITY FOR AN ELEMENT BY ASSIGNING A SCALED VALUE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE RELATIVE SECURITY THEREOFNovember 2004October 2010Allow6050YesNo
10971903METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR THE RENTAL OR SALE, AND SECURE DISTRIBUTION OF DIGITAL CONTENTOctober 2004June 2008Allow4400NoNo
10766591Arbitration of online game results using an arbitration server and methodJanuary 2004April 2009Allow6020YesNo
10406659VERIFYING AUDIO OUTPUT AT A CLIENT DEVICEApril 2003June 2010Allow6050YesNo
10266660MULTI-FUNCTION ELECTRONIC TRANSACTION CARDOctober 2002March 2011Allow6020NoYes
10013019DIRECT ONLINE MORTGAGE AUCTION NETWORKNovember 2001July 2008Allow6030NoYes
09909587SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INTERACTIVE BEEF CATTLE MARKETPLACEJuly 2001April 2009Allow6020NoYes
09884296USING A PRIVACY AGREEMENT FRAMEWORK TO IMPROVE HANDLING OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATIONJune 2001June 2009Allow6040YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
4
Examiner Affirmed
1
(25.0%)
Examiner Reversed
3
(75.0%)
Reversal Percentile
89.7%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 75.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
6
Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
83.3%
Higher 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, 50.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E works in Art Unit 3699 and has examined 29 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 65.5%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 56 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E's allowance rate of 65.5% places them in the 26% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E receive 3.72 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.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E is 56 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.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a -6.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E. This interview benefit is in the 4% 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, 12.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 8% 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 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 50% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 55.6% of appeals filed. This is in the 28% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 25.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 13% 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 Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 20.7% of allowed cases (in the 98% 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 10.5% of allowed cases (in the 89% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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

  • 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 extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.