USPTO Examiner ROBERT EDUARDO C - Art Unit 3773

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18602968INTERSPINOUS SPACER WITH A RANGE OF DEPLOYMENT POSITIONS AND METHODS AND SYSTEMSMarch 2024June 2025Allow1500NoNo
18103949FLEXIBLE INTERVERTEBRAL FUSION CAGE WITH OPENINGJanuary 2023January 2025Abandon2410NoNo
18095409METHOD OF CONTROLLING SYMPTOMS RELATING TO COVID-19January 2023June 2025Allow3010NoNo
17957733TREATMENT OF SPINAL INJURY WITH MULTIFOCAL POLYMERSeptember 2022June 2024Allow2120YesNo
17865736ADJUSTABLE SPINAL IMPLANTS, ASSOCIATED INSTRUMENTS AND METHODSJuly 2022September 2023Abandon1410NoNo
17808538SPINAL SURGICAL APPROACH METHODJune 2022June 2025Abandon3611NoNo
17839460Modular Bone Anchor AssemblyJune 2022May 2025Abandon3530NoNo
17752330Intervertebral spinal implant systemsMay 2022May 2025Abandon3601NoNo
17773873EXTERNAL CORRECTIVE APPLIANCEMay 2022June 2025Abandon3801NoNo
17695296DISC PROSTHESIS FOR CONTROLLED FUSIONMarch 2022February 2025Abandon3540NoNo
17542378EXPANDABLE INTERBODY IMPLANT DEVICEDecember 2021January 2025Abandon3730NoNo
17539756CONNECTION DEVICE FOR USE WITH EXTENSION MEMBERS OF A BONE ANCHORDecember 2021April 2024Allow2830NoNo
17484304ILIAC CREST DISPLACEMENT DEVICE AND METHODSeptember 2021June 2023Abandon2110NoNo
17398928METATARSAL ALIGNMENT APPARATUSAugust 2021June 2023Abandon2201NoNo
17367892DIAGNOSTIC CERVICAL SCANNING AND TREATMENT DEVICEJuly 2021January 2025Abandon4211NoNo
17414032SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TREATING PERIPROSTHETIC FRACTURESJune 2021January 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17213600SPINAL DISC REPLACEMENTS AND METHODS OF MAKING THEREOFMarch 2021February 2025Abandon4721NoNo
17190438MAGNETIC PROSTHETIC NAIL AND METHOD OF IMPLANTATION OF THE SAMEMarch 2021January 2023Abandon2211NoNo
17145081EXPANDABLE RETRACTOR BLADE ASSEMBLYJanuary 2021September 2022Abandon2120NoNo
16950795Retractor Systems with SensorsNovember 2020March 2023Allow2810YesNo
17083677ORGAN RETRACTOROctober 2020July 2022Abandon2110NoNo
17084158EXTERNAL FIXATION DEVICEOctober 2020February 2023Abandon2710NoNo
17042282INSERTION ANGLE-ADJUSTABLE IMPLANT CAGE FOR OBLIQUE LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION SURGERYSeptember 2020February 2023Abandon2921NoNo
16981759BONE FIXATION IMPLANT AND METHOD OF IMPLANTATIONSeptember 2020February 2023Abandon2930NoNo
16978836Ankle (Tibio-Talar) Fusion NailSeptember 2020August 2022Abandon2330NoNo
16958398SPINAL FUSION SYSTEMJune 2020September 2022Abandon2721NoNo
16882187Bone Implant Having Tether BandMay 2020May 2022Abandon2410NoNo
16880810POSTERIOR SPINAL FIXATION SCREWSMay 2020August 2022Abandon2721YesNo
16818240EXTERNAL FIXATION DEVICEMarch 2020January 2023Abandon3430NoNo
16802695SEGMENTED ALIGNMENT ROD ASSEMBLYFebruary 2020March 2022Allow2510YesNo
16748081MULTI-CAP REMOVING-AND-HOLDING INSTRUMENT FOR SPINAL SURGERIESJanuary 2020November 2022Abandon3440NoNo
16734454DISPENSING FASTENERSJanuary 2020July 2022Allow3010NoNo
16723456BONE INTRAMEDULLARY FIXATION SCAFFOLDDecember 2019February 2022Allow2510NoNo
16680696METHOD FOR IMPLANTING A ROD IMPLANT ALONG A SPINE OF A PATIENTNovember 2019March 2022Abandon2820NoNo
16552184SURGICAL PORT ASSEMBLIES AND METHODSAugust 2019August 2021Abandon2310NoNo
16537399PERCUTANEOUS ACCESS DEVICES AND BONE ANCHOR ASSEMBLIESAugust 2019November 2019Abandon300NoNo
16485037SURGICAL IMPLANT SYSTEM FOR TREATING FIFTH METATARSAL JONES FRACTURESAugust 2019June 2022Abandon3410NoNo
16480559AXIALLY PRECISE SCREWDRIVERJuly 2019February 2023Abandon4340YesNo
16441951Biomaterial Delivery Device, And Related Systems And MethodsJune 2019November 2021Allow3021NoNo
16238160PIVOTAL BONE ANCHOR ASSEMBLY WITH SNAP-IN-PLACE BIASING BUSHING FOR PRE-LOCK FRICTION FITJanuary 2019April 2019Abandon300NoNo
16093034SPINAL INSTRUMENTATION TO ENHANCE OSTEOGENESIS AND FUSIONOctober 2018September 2022Abandon4801NoNo
16135754DYNAMIC STABILIZATION SYSTEMSeptember 2018October 2020Abandon2520NoNo
15665567CONFORMING BONE STABILIZATION RECEIVERAugust 2017April 2018Allow900NoNo
15618499SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PERFORMING VERTEBRAL REDUCTION USING A SLEEVEJune 2017May 2018Allow1120NoNo
15357053SPINAL ROD REDUCTION SYSTEMNovember 2016October 2018Abandon2320NoNo
14918198BONE FIXATION TENSIONING TOOL AND METHODOctober 2015December 2018Abandon3740YesNo
14586487Fixation System, An Intramedullary Fixation Assembly and Method of UseDecember 2014October 2018Abandon4541YesNo
13625694JOINT ARTHROPLASTY DEVICES AND SURGICAL TOOLSSeptember 2012June 2013Allow910NoNo
13405797JOINT ARTHROPLASTY DEVICES AND SURGICAL TOOLSFebruary 2012August 2015Allow4120NoNo
12777809METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR ARTICULAR REPAIRMay 2010September 2014Allow5240YesNo
12135603PATIENT SELECTABLE JOINT ARTHROPLASTY DEVICES AND SURGICAL TOOLSJune 2008May 2011Allow3610YesNo
10675864INTRAMEDULLARY IMPLANT FOR FRACTURE FIXATIONSeptember 2003January 2006Allow2710NoNo

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 ROBERT, EDUARDO C - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ROBERT, EDUARDO C works in Art Unit 3773 and has examined 51 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 29.4%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 28 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner ROBERT, EDUARDO C's allowance rate of 29.4% places them in the 2% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by ROBERT, EDUARDO C receive 1.71 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 49% 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 ROBERT, EDUARDO C is 28 months. This places the examiner in the 54% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +31.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ROBERT, EDUARDO C. This interview benefit is in the 83% 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, 17.2% 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 25.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 26% 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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 85% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 2.0% of allowed cases (in the 77% 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 41% 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:

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • 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.
  • 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.