USPTO Examiner FARRELL KATHLEEN PAIGE - Art Unit 3783

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17253705Medicament Delivery DeviceDecember 2020July 2023Allow3100NoNo
17253073NEEDLE UNIT WITH BIOSTATIC CHAMBERDecember 2020May 2024Abandon4120NoNo
17097582HEMOSTASIS VALVE FOR SHEATH ASSEMBLYNovember 2020August 2024Allow4531NoNo
17054654AN INTRAVENOUS CATHETER DEVICENovember 2020January 2024Allow3830NoNo
17085562DRUG INFUSION PORTOctober 2020November 2023Allow3721YesNo
17085360IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE FOR DELIVERY OF PHARMACOLOGICAL AGENTS TO THE DEEP BRAIN STRUCTURESOctober 2020February 2024Allow3930YesNo
17037181DRUG SOLUTION ADMINISTRATION DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD FOR DRUG SOLUTION ADMINISTRATION DEVICESeptember 2020January 2025Abandon5230YesNo
17043244METHOD OF REMOVAL OF GAS FROM RESERVOIRSeptember 2020December 2024Abandon5020NoNo
17027773ILLUMINATING GUIDEWIRE WITH SLIP COUPLING BETWEEN SEGMENTSSeptember 2020April 2025Abandon5551YesNo
17017339TECHNIQUE AND METHOD TO LOCALLY DELIVER OBJECTS INTO BONESeptember 2020November 2023Abandon3801NoNo
16969946Medical Injection Device for Supporting a Medical Container Filled With a Pharmaceutical CompositionAugust 2020March 2023Allow3110YesNo
16968767MEDICAL DEVICE FOR THE DELIVERY OF THERAPEUTIC FORMULATIONS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOFAugust 2020March 2024Abandon4310NoNo

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 FARRELL, KATHLEEN PAIGE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner FARRELL, KATHLEEN PAIGE works in Art Unit 3783 and has examined 12 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 50.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 41 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner FARRELL, KATHLEEN PAIGE's allowance rate of 50.0% places them in the 14% 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 FARRELL, KATHLEEN PAIGE receive 2.08 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 51% 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 FARRELL, KATHLEEN PAIGE is 41 months. This places the examiner in the 22% 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 +17.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by FARRELL, KATHLEEN PAIGE. This interview benefit is in the 57% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

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 42% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 5% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.

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.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • 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.