USPTO Examiner BASET NASHEHA - Art Unit 3771

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17064889APPLIED TO A SKELETAL MINI ANCHORAGE SITEOctober 2020March 2023Abandon3010NoNo
17031133BARBED MESH FOR INCISION CLOSURE AND HERNIA REPAIRSeptember 2020April 2023Allow3110YesNo
17022577ROBOTIC CATARACT SURGERY USING FOCUSED ULTRASOUNDSeptember 2020June 2024Allow4530YesNo
17017056FAR BONE SUTURE BUTTONSeptember 2020April 2023Allow3101YesNo
17016173ATHERECTOMY SYSTEM WITH ELECTROMAGNETIC GUIDEWIRE CLAMPSeptember 2020April 2023Allow3110YesNo
17010087SYSTEMS, SUTURE DEVICES, AND METHODS FOR TISSUE CLOSURESeptember 2020April 2024Allow4431YesNo
16994750FLEXIBLE CANNULA HAVING SELECTIVE RIGIDITYAugust 2020March 2023Allow3110YesNo
16936332Orthopedic Fixation Devices and MethodsJuly 2020July 2023Allow3611YesNo
16876330APPARATUS FOR TREATING GERDMay 2020January 2024Allow4410NoNo
16635946IMPLANT FOR MEDICAL USE INTENDED TO CLIP TO A BIOLOGICAL PROTUBERANCEJanuary 2020January 2023Allow3610NoNo
16347634VARIABLE RIGIDITY, CONFORMABLE APPARATUS FOR NON-INVASIVELY AFFIXING SURGICAL FIDUCIALS AND SURGICAL TOOLS TO PATIENTSMay 2019December 2023Allow5610YesNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner BASET, NASHEHA - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner BASET, NASHEHA works in Art Unit 3771 and has examined 11 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 90.9%, 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 BASET, NASHEHA's allowance rate of 90.9% places them in the 75% 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 BASET, NASHEHA receive 1.27 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 15% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BASET, NASHEHA is 36 months. This places the examiner in the 38% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +33.3% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BASET, NASHEHA. This interview benefit is in the 80% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 98% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 100% 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.

Petition Practice

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 Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 44% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments less often than average. You may need to make most claim amendments yourself.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 50% 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:

  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.

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.