USPTO Examiner LEGENDRE CHRISTOPHER RYAN - Art Unit 3711

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19074073TURBINE ENGINE WITH A BLADE ASSEMBLY HAVING A SET OF COOLING CONDUITSMarch 2025January 2026Allow1100YesNo
19039766FAIL SAFE SYSTEM FOR WIND TURBINE NACELLEJanuary 2025February 2026Allow1210YesNo
18998269ELASTIC ROTARY BEARING FOR TWO-BLADE ROTORS OF WIND TURBINESJanuary 2025February 2026Allow1320YesNo
18969648MOUNTING SYSTEM FOR HARDWARE ON STATIONARY STRUCTUREDecember 2024November 2025Allow1200YesNo
18857835BROADBAND OSCILLATION SUPPRESSION METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR WIND-STORAGE COMBINATIONOctober 2024January 2026Allow1510YesNo
18842340INSERT ASSEMBLY FOR A ROTARY APPARATUS, RELATED APPARATUS AND METHODAugust 2024October 2025Allow1410YesNo
18796547STATOR VANE ASSEMBLY OF A TURBOMACHINE AND METHOD FOR ASSEMBLING A STATOR VANE ASSEMBLYAugust 2024October 2025Allow1411YesNo
18769465WIND TURBINE ASSEMBLIES AND DEPLOYMENT METHODSJuly 2024February 2026Allow2021YesNo
18608521FUSED ROTORMarch 2024December 2025Allow2120NoNo
18424121AERONAUTICAL PROPULSION SYSTEM COMPRISING AN OPTIMIZED FAN SECTIONJanuary 2024January 2026Allow2420YesNo
18418908FRAMED HEAT EXCHANGER FOR AIRCRAFT PROPULSION SYSTEMJanuary 2024February 2026Allow2510YesNo
18358134SHROUDED TOOTHED WHEEL FOR AIRCRAFT ENGINEJuly 2023January 2026Abandon3030YesNo
16929220MULTI-RING SPACER FOR GAS TURBINE ENGINE ROTOR STACK ASSEMBLYJuly 2020September 2025Allow6041YesYes
16532617AIRFOIL WITH ARCED BAFFLEAugust 2019October 2025Allow6041NoYes
16363529LUMINOUS FANMarch 2019November 2020Allow2000YesNo
16358508VERTICAL-AXIS WIND TURBINEMarch 2019January 2021Allow2210YesNo
15947171Stress Relief Via Unblended Edge Radii in Blade Attachments in Gas TurbinesApril 2018November 2020Allow3120YesNo
15796011VANE DEVICE FOR A WIND TURBINE APPARATUSOctober 2017March 2020Allow2910YesNo
15196145PITCH CONTROL ASSEMBLY AND PROPELLER ASSEMBLY AND METHOD OF ADJUSTING PITCHJune 2016August 2019Allow3820YesNo
15172700MODULAR MULTI-AXIAL ROTORJune 2016March 2017Allow910YesNo
15073739IMPELLERS, BLOOD PUMPS, AND METHODS OF TREATING A SUBJECTMarch 2016March 2019Allow3621YesNo
14831240EMBEDDED TURBOFAN DEICER SYSTEMAugust 2015February 2017Allow1810YesNo
14675707EXHAUST GAS TURBOCHARGERMarch 2015November 2017Allow3110YesNo
14666333Wind Power Station for RooftopsMarch 2015August 2017Allow2810YesNo
14592057ROTOR OF ROTARY MACHINE AND ROTARY MACHINEJanuary 2015February 2017Allow2510YesNo
14369545ESTIMATING AND CONTROLLING LOADING EXPERIENCED IN A STRUCTUREJune 2014June 2018Allow4840YesNo
14297957MECHANICAL SEALJune 2014November 2016Allow2940YesNo
14145550Airfoil for a Flying Wind TurbineDecember 2013May 2017Allow4120YesNo
14132480NOZZLE ASSEMBLY FOR USE WITH A WIND LENS SYSTEM FOR THE GENERATION OF ELECTRIC POWERDecember 2013October 2016Allow3410YesNo
14132446CONICAL FAN ASSEMBLY FOR USE IN A WIND TURBINE FOR THE GENERATION OF POWERDecember 2013October 2016Allow3410YesNo
14072252APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MEASURING GAS FLOW THROUGH A ROTARY SEALNovember 2013March 2017Allow4020YesNo
14022550METHOD AND GUIDE FOR REMOVING AN INNER CASING FROM A TURBOMACHINESeptember 2013August 2016Allow3520YesNo
14004332HYDRODYNAMIC SLIDING BEARING, IN PARTICULAR OF A MAGNETIC COUPLING PUMPSeptember 2013September 2016Allow3710YesNo
13929462DIFFUSER FOR THE EXHAUST SECTION OF A GAS TURBINE AND GAS TURBINE WITH SUCH A DIFFUSERJune 2013April 2016Allow3310NoNo
13904414WIND TURBINE BLADE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING A WIND TURBINE BLADEMay 2013March 2016Allow3320NoNo
13819861GUIDE APPARATUS FOR TURBOMACHINESApril 2013March 2016Allow3610YesNo
13746486PURGE AND COOLING AIR FOR AN EXHAUST SECTION OF A GAS TURBINE ASSEMBLYJanuary 2013February 2016Allow3610NoNo
13806006NACELLE COVERJanuary 2013April 2016Allow4010YesNo
13716465WIND WINGDecember 2012March 2014Allow1511NoNo
13679647VACUUM-ACTUATED WASTEGATENovember 2012January 2016Allow3810NoNo
13677524LIQUID PUMP WITH AXIAL THRUST WASHERNovember 2012March 2016Allow4020YesNo
13486428VERTICAL AXIS WIND TURBINE BLADEJune 2012March 2015Allow3320NoNo
13444306ARCHIMEDEAN MODULAR / MULTI-AXIS ROTOR (AMR)April 2012October 2014Allow3010NoNo
13444152OFFSHORE WIND TURBINE HAVING A SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR INTERCHANGEABLE CONTAINERS, THE SUPPORT SYSTEM BEING COMBINED WITH A WAVE RUN-UP DEFLECTOR AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAMEApril 2012April 2015Allow3610NoNo
13444070AXIALLY-SPLIT RADIAL TURBINES AND METHODS FOR THE MANUFACTURE THEREOFApril 2012January 2015Allow3310NoNo
13500266SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY USING A FLOW OF AIRApril 2012November 2015Allow4410NoNo
13331863Gas Turbine Bladed Rotor For Aeronautic Engines And Method For Cooling Said Bladed RotorDecember 2011July 2015Allow4220NoNo
12967884ENHANCED AXIAL AIR MOVER SYSTEM WITH FLOOR EDGEDecember 2010November 2012Allow2320YesNo
12960529SUPPORT FOR A LARGE VERTICAL AXIS WIND TURBINEDecember 2010September 2013Allow3330YesNo
12952715CENTRIFUGAL FANNovember 2010January 2014Allow3810NoNo
12835401GUIDE DEVICEJuly 2010April 2012Allow2110NoNo
12374925IMPULSE TURBINE FOR USE IN BI-DIRECTIONAL FLOWSApril 2010July 2013Allow5410NoNo
12732958BLADE OUTER SEAL FOR A GAS TURBINE ENGINEMarch 2010June 2013Allow3920YesNo
12706241MULTIPLE PIECE TURBINE ROTOR BLADEFebruary 2010September 2013Abandon4220NoNo
12640033BLADE OUTER AIR SEAL FORMED OF STACKED PANELSDecember 2009March 2013Allow3920NoNo
12632152SYSTEM FOR REDUCING THE LEVEL OF EROSION AFFECTING A COMPONENTDecember 2009August 2012Allow3200NoNo
12592119WIND AEOLIPILENovember 2009June 2013Allow4320NoNo
12598952SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EXTRACTING POWER FROM FLUID USING A TESLA-TYPE BLADELESS TURBINENovember 2009May 2014Allow5521YesNo
12596331UNDERWATER STRUCTURESOctober 2009February 2013Allow4010NoNo
12303068METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTING WIND ENERGY CONVERTING SYSTEMSSeptember 2009November 2012Allow4810NoNo
12461575MOBILE WIND TURBINEAugust 2009August 2012Allow3640YesNo
12525156TURBINE BLADEJuly 2009May 2012Allow3410NoNo
12482248ANTI-SUDDEN INFANT DEATH SYNDROME BABY FANJune 2009August 2012Allow3820NoNo
12482077FAN ASSEMBLYJune 2009May 2012Allow3520NoNo
12472195SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CLEARANCE CONTROLMay 2009February 2012Allow3210YesNo
11579372EXHAUST GAS TURBOCHARGER WITH ADJUSTABLE SLIDE RINGAugust 2008February 2012Allow6020YesNo
12051944AXIAL FLOW HYDRAULIC TURBINE WITH FIXED BLADES BOLTED-ONMarch 2008January 2013Allow5840NoNo
12051940AXIAL FLOW HYDRAULIC TURBINE WITH BLADE MOUNTINGMarch 2008May 2012Allow5020NoNo
12072227WIND TURBINE MULTI-PANEL BLADEFebruary 2008June 2012Allow5220NoNo

Appeals Overview

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
2
Examiner Affirmed
1
(50.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(50.0%)
Reversal Percentile
78.0%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 50.0% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. 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
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(33.3%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(66.7%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
54.9%
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, 33.3% 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.

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 LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RYAN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RYAN works in Art Unit 3711 and has examined 57 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 98.2%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 36 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RYAN's allowance rate of 98.2% places them in the 91% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RYAN receive 1.68 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 35% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RYAN is 36 months. This places the examiner in the 37% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +3.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RYAN. This interview benefit is in the 26% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 39% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 75.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 94% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

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 21% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 20% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 14.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 9% 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 3.5% of allowed cases (in the 81% 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 45% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions less often than average. Allowances may come directly without a separate action for formal matters.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.
  • 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.