USPTO Examiner O'CONNELL RACHEL - Art Unit 3781

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17257247STRUCTUREDecember 2020May 2024Abandon4101NoNo
17132284SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO COLLECTION OF BIOLOGICAL FLUIDSDecember 2020August 2023Allow3101NoNo
17253050BLOOD CLEANSING SYSTEMDecember 2020January 2024Abandon3710NoNo
17251552MEDICATION INFUSION DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODSDecember 2020March 2024Allow3920NoNo
17058569IMPROVEMENTS IN OSTOMY ATTACHMENTSNovember 2020June 2024Allow4350YesNo
17097512PHYSIOLOGICAL PANTSNovember 2020June 2024Allow4310NoNo
17095844PLUG FOR INSERTION INTO THE NOSE OR EAR OF A SUBJECT AND METHOD FOR ADMINISTERING A FLUID THERAPEUTIC AGENT USING SAID PLUGNovember 2020January 2025Allow5021NoNo
17083575FELINE FOLEY CATHETEROctober 2020December 2023Abandon3720YesNo
17081028Vaginal Cleansing DeviceOctober 2020December 2023Abandon3810NoNo
17046411ANCHORING DEVICES FOR IMPLANTED TUBES AND RELATED METHODSOctober 2020May 2024Allow4310NoNo
17045956METHOD TO DYNAMICALLY MEASURE APPOSITION AND PATIENT LIMB MOVEMENT IN A NEGATIVE PRESSURE CLOSED INCISION DRESSINGOctober 2020November 2023Allow3741NoNo
17062589NASAL PLUGOctober 2020December 2024Allow5120NoNo
16976146DEVICE FOR MONITORING THE VASCULAR ACCESS IN AN EXTRACORPOREAL BLOOD TREATMENTAugust 2020February 2023Allow3030YesNo
16970967SENSOR ASSEMBLY PART AND A BASE PLATE FOR A MEDICAL APPLIANCE AND A DEVICE FOR CONNECTING TO A BASE PLATE AND/OR A SENSOR ASSEMBLY PARTAugust 2020November 2023Allow3940NoNo
16984490SURGICAL CLEANING TOOL, SYSTEMS, AND METHODSAugust 2020June 2023Allow3420NoNo
16961768SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SENSING PROPERTIES OF WOUND EXUDATESJuly 2020January 2024Allow4240YesYes
16921084SYSTEMS INCLUDING EXTERNAL CATHETER FOR AUTOMATICALLY COLLECTING URINE FROM A FEMALE PATIENT AND METHODS OF USEJuly 2020March 2023Abandon3220NoNo
15733338DEVICE TO BE DEPLOYED AND RETAINED IN TWO OPPOSITE CAVITIESJuly 2020August 2023Allow3720YesNo
16901578BLADDER IRRIGATION TOOLJune 2020November 2024Abandon5340YesYes
16888292Medical Suction Devices and Uses ThereofMay 2020May 2025Allow5960YesNo
16864275CALCULATING CARDIAC OUTPUT OF A PATIENT UNDERGOING VENO-VENOUS EXTRACORPOREAL BLOOD OXYGENATIONMay 2020January 2023Allow3221YesNo
16858233CATHETER INCLUDING ONE OR MORE SENSORSApril 2020May 2023Abandon3710NoNo
16856386Control SystemApril 2020July 2024Allow5131YesNo
16836721BLOOD MONITORING SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING A CALIBRATED HEMOGLOBIN CONCENTRATION VALUE FOR A PATIENT BASED ON PATIENT-SPECIFIC MEAN CORPUSCULAR HEMOGLOBIN CONCENTRATION DATAMarch 2020August 2023Abandon4020NoNo
16834079METHOD FOR AUTOMATICALLY REMOVING URINE FROM A FEMALE PATIENTMarch 2020November 2022Abandon3120NoNo
16783222Stoma Cleaning Apparatus and MethodFebruary 2020August 2023Abandon4241YesNo
16781035MEDICAL DEVICE DISLODGMENT DETECTIONFebruary 2020May 2023Abandon3920YesNo
16635638APPARATUSES AND METHODS FOR REMOVING FLUID FROM A WOUND UTILIZING CONTROLLED AIRFLOWJanuary 2020August 2023Abandon4230NoNo
16748376MEDICAL ASPIRATIONJanuary 2020March 2025Allow6061YesYes
16631686DRUG MIXING DEVICEJanuary 2020October 2022Abandon3310NoNo
16729160DIAPER STATE SENSOR AND NOTIFICATION NETWORKDecember 2019May 2023Abandon4110NoNo
16622331METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ADDING AN ANTICOAGULANT TO THE BLOOD OF A PATIENTDecember 2019October 2022Allow3420YesNo
16710977Method and Apparatus for a Perforable Absorbent Portion Bandage (PAP-B) for Avoidance of Constant Adhesive RemovalDecember 2019November 2022Abandon3620YesNo
16707788CANNULAS AND CANNULA ASSEMBLIES FOR HEMODIALYSISDecember 2019March 2023Abandon3911NoNo
16620677HOLDER FOR A CURVED DUCT PORTIONDecember 2019November 2022Allow3520YesYes
16685982ASPIRATION STENOSIS AND METHOD THEREFORNovember 2019April 2024Abandon5340NoNo
16613768NEGATIVE PRESSURE WOUND THERAPY SYSTEM USING EULERIAN VIDEO MAGNIFICATIONNovember 2019February 2024Allow5150YesNo
16613350SKIN BARRIER INCLUDING SKIN FRIENDLY INGREDIENTSNovember 2019December 2024Allow6061YesYes
16612922ABSORBENT ARTICLENovember 2019May 2023Abandon4240YesNo
16610568ABSORBENT BIOPHOTONIC DEVICES AND SYSTEMS FOR WOUND HEALINGNovember 2019May 2023Abandon4230NoNo
16602519Wound Dressing containing a vacuum pumpOctober 2019January 2024Abandon5040YesNo
16498412BODY SIDE MEMBER OF AN OSTOMY APPLIANCESeptember 2019November 2023Allow5060YesNo
16498597Flow Sensor for Cerebral Fluidic DeviceSeptember 2019August 2023Allow4640YesNo
16490819ULTRASONIC THROMBUS REMOVING SYSTEMSeptember 2019October 2022Allow3710YesNo
16520259DISPOSABLE COMPOSTABLE DIAPER AND FULFILLMENT SERVICEJuly 2019July 2023Abandon4711NoNo
16479938DEVICE AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATICALLY VENTING AND FILLING A CATHETERJuly 2019May 2024Abandon5820NoNo
16422929Hydrotherapy DeviceMay 2019October 2022Allow4121NoNo
16331487TYMPANOSTOMY TUBE AND PLACEMENT DEVICEMarch 2019September 2022Allow4320YesNo
16327450Tool(s) for Inserting a Glaucoma ShuntFebruary 2019January 2023Allow4730YesNo
16302280AFTER-INSECT BITE DEVICE AND METHODNovember 2018October 2022Abandon4710NoNo
16089453WOUND THERAPY SYSTEMSeptember 2018April 2023Abandon5420NoNo
16066211LOW PARTICULATE SURGICAL SPEARJune 2018November 2022Abandon5201NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner O'CONNELL, RACHEL.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
8
Allowed After Appeal Filing
4
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
4
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
83.5%
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

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

Examiner O'CONNELL, RACHEL - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner O'CONNELL, RACHEL works in Art Unit 3781 and has examined 52 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 51.9%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 42 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner O'CONNELL, RACHEL's allowance rate of 51.9% places them in the 15% 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 O'CONNELL, RACHEL receive 2.54 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 71% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by O'CONNELL, RACHEL is 42 months. This places the examiner in the 20% 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 +35.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by O'CONNELL, RACHEL. This interview benefit is in the 82% 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, 19.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 21% 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 30.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 45% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 50.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 47% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show below-average success with this examiner. Consider whether your arguments are strong enough to warrant a PAC request.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 99% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 40.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

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 45% 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 51% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions more often than average when claims are allowable but formal matters remain (MPEP § 714.14).

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.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.