Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18767470 | HANGER WITH ROTATING HANGER BODY | July 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18534891 | Ironing Board intended for use with a steam-type ironing device | December 2023 | August 2025 | Allow | 20 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18259933 | LAUNDRY TREATMENT APPARATUS AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAME | June 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16824453 | Batting Glove and Cushioning Apparatus | March 2020 | July 2025 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 15285145 | Gown with Concentric Sleeves and Corresponding Methods | October 2016 | May 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 1 | No | Yes |
| 13243275 | Helmet For Cooling Head | September 2011 | March 2013 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 13147720 | FLUID CONTAINER CARRYING DEVICE AND A NECK PROTECTION DEVICE PROVIDED WITH SUCH A FLUID CONTAINER CARRYING DEVICE | August 2011 | March 2013 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12905484 | YOGA GLOVE | October 2010 | April 2012 | Allow | 18 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12850030 | PERSONAL ROLL BAR | August 2010 | August 2012 | Allow | 25 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12655707 | Partial protective wear | January 2010 | October 2012 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12484167 | GARMENT HAVING ROLL-UP AND STOW SLEEVES | June 2009 | June 2012 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12405188 | LOWER-BODY GARMENT HAVING A SECURE WAIST ASSEMBLY | March 2009 | October 2011 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12322950 | BASEBALL CAP WITH NECK PROTECTION VISOR | February 2009 | August 2011 | Allow | 30 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12264362 | HAIR RETAINING HEADWEAR SYSTEM | November 2008 | October 2011 | Allow | 35 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 12287823 | INFANT WRAP AND METHOD FOR USE | October 2008 | May 2011 | Allow | 31 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 12034615 | SUICIDE PREVENTION CLOTHING | February 2008 | October 2012 | Allow | 56 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 12007597 | POSITIONING STRUCTURE FOR THE MALE REPRODUCTIVE ORGAN | January 2008 | August 2009 | Allow | 19 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 11858350 | CONCEALABLE/DEPLOYABLE REFLECTIVE BAND FOR GARMENTS | September 2007 | January 2010 | Allow | 28 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11850308 | COMBINATION HAT AND SUNGLASSES/GOGGLES | September 2007 | December 2009 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11794046 | GARMENT WITH PLAYTHING | August 2007 | April 2010 | Allow | 34 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 11630750 | GARMENT FOR SPORTING ACTIVITY | April 2007 | October 2010 | Allow | 46 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11716604 | HAIR DRYING CAP | March 2007 | July 2010 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 11655102 | FUMBLE FLAPS | January 2007 | January 2011 | Allow | 48 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11639654 | BASEBALL GLOVE HAVING A PALM SECTION PROVIDED WITH A CUSHION SHEET | December 2006 | April 2008 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11639644 | BASEBALL GLOVE HAVING FINGER-LIMITING RIB | December 2006 | January 2008 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11638316 | RETRACTABLE HAT TETHER WITH BOTTLE OPENER DEVICE | December 2006 | July 2008 | Allow | 19 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11608604 | WORK GLOVE HAVING HANDLING TOOL | December 2006 | January 2008 | Allow | 13 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11538641 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PREVENTING THE SPREAD OF GERMS WHILE COUGHING OR SNEEZING | October 2006 | December 2009 | Allow | 38 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11517243 | EXPANDABLE GARMENT FOR CHILDREN | September 2006 | November 2010 | Allow | 50 | 1 | 1 | No | No |
| 11363588 | INFANT HATS, CAPS, BONNETS, AND HOODS WITH PADDED PRESSURE RELIEF REGION | February 2006 | July 2008 | Allow | 29 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11344597 | BALL CATCHING TOOL FOR BASEBALL OR SOFTBALL | January 2006 | October 2010 | Allow | 57 | 1 | 2 | No | No |
| 11318010 | HYDRATION AND MOTORCYCLE PROTECTION COMBINATION SYSTEM | December 2005 | October 2009 | Allow | 45 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11282344 | ADJUSTABLE HEADWEAR WITH INTEGRATED HAIR BAND | November 2005 | October 2009 | Allow | 47 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11281046 | MITT | November 2005 | August 2007 | Allow | 21 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11272181 | SINGLE STRAP OVERALLS | November 2005 | November 2008 | Allow | 36 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11246886 | HEAD ORNAMENTATION | October 2005 | September 2008 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 11230244 | MASK FOR EYES | September 2005 | April 2008 | Allow | 31 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 11228403 | ADJUSTABLE BANDANA | September 2005 | June 2009 | Allow | 45 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 11201062 | NEONATE WARMTH STOCKING CAP | August 2005 | June 2006 | Allow | 10 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11160968 | FINGERTIP FLEXOR GLOVE | July 2005 | November 2006 | Allow | 16 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11149247 | HEAD PROTECTIVE DEVICE INCORPORATING A SWEATBAND BANDANA | June 2005 | May 2006 | Allow | 11 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11122437 | EAR COVERING AND MANUFACTURING METHOD | May 2005 | March 2006 | Allow | 10 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11108280 | PERISCOPE SWIM GOGGLES | April 2005 | April 2006 | Allow | 12 | 0 | 0 | No | No |
| 11102388 | HEADWEAR PIECE WITH ADJUSTABLE HEAD RECEIVING DIAMETER | April 2005 | June 2009 | Allow | 51 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10912435 | COMBINED GARMENT AND SAFETY HARNESS | August 2004 | July 2008 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 10852232 | SWIMMING GOGGLES | May 2004 | August 2006 | Allow | 27 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 10852231 | SWIMMING GOGGLES | May 2004 | July 2006 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 10841660 | COMBINED BANDANA AND GOGGLES | May 2004 | July 2006 | Allow | 26 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 10794612 | HEADWEAR PIECE WITH ASSOCIATED RIM | March 2004 | September 2006 | Allow | 30 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 10786408 | APPARATUS FOR HOLDING A PAINT CAN EMPLOYING A GLOVE AND SLEEVE | February 2004 | March 2006 | Allow | 24 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 10767033 | COMBINATION EYE AND EAR PROTECTION APPARATUS | January 2004 | November 2005 | Allow | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 10603089 | NOVELTY HAT | June 2003 | October 2005 | Allow | 28 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner TOMPKINS, ALISSA JILL.
With a 100.0% 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.
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.
✓ 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 TOMPKINS, ALISSA JILL works in Art Unit 3732 and has examined 49 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 30 months.
Examiner TOMPKINS, ALISSA JILL's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 100% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by TOMPKINS, ALISSA JILL receive 1.86 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 44% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by TOMPKINS, ALISSA JILL is 30 months. This places the examiner in the 62% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by TOMPKINS, ALISSA JILL. 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, 46.2% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 96% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 61.1% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 86% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 150.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 90% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 75.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 66% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 50.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows above-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. The mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) provides an opportunity for reconsideration.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 55.6% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 57% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 18.4% of allowed cases (in the 97% 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 4.1% of allowed cases (in the 78% 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.
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.