USPTO Examiner STATON PHOEBE ANNE - Art Unit 3783

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17115072KIT FOR PREVENTING DISTAL EMBOLISM DURING ENDOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS AND METHOD FOR PREVENTING DISTAL EMBOLISM DURING ENDOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS USING SAID KITDecember 2020May 2023Abandon2910NoNo
17052846INSERTION TYPE DRUG INJECTION DEVICENovember 2020November 2022Allow2530YesNo
17052532A CATHETER MOUNTING ARRANGEMENT FOR SECURING A CATHETER TO A PATIENT AND A METHOD OF MAINTAINING THE SECURING AND INTEGRITY IN FLUID FLOW WITHIN THE CATHETER WHILE MOUNTED TO THE PATIENTNovember 2020October 2023Allow3610NoNo
17085325Catheter Securing Devices and MethodsOctober 2020April 2023Abandon2910NoNo
17082346SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EXPANDING A CATHETEROctober 2020July 2022Allow2010NoNo
16949192NASOGASTRIC TUBE STABILIZATION SYSTEMOctober 2020April 2024Allow4230YesNo
17072867DISPOSABLE MEDICAL DEVICE INTRODUCTION SYSTEMOctober 2020April 2023Allow3010NoNo
17061761DIRECTIONAL BALLOON TRANSSEPTAL INSERTION DEVICE FOR MEDICAL PROCEDURES WITH IMPROVED HANDLEOctober 2020January 2023Allow2801NoNo
17044184SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ULTRASONIC BLADDER THERAPEUTIC AGENT DELIVERYSeptember 2020August 2022Allow2211YesNo
17036346DRUG SOLUTION ADMINISTRATION DEVICESeptember 2020August 2023Abandon3411NoNo
17031478Integrated Acute Central Venous Catheter and Peripherally Inserted Venous CatheterSeptember 2020September 2022Allow2310NoNo
17030058MEDICAL CONNECTORS HAVING INTEGRATED ADHESIVE BACKINGSeptember 2020February 2023Allow2921YesNo
17026557STRAIN RELIEF AND METHODS OF USE THEREOFSeptember 2020May 2023Allow3110YesNo
16982768MEDICAL TUBE HOLDERSeptember 2020July 2022Allow2220NoNo
17017276EXPANDABLE MOUTH CATHETERSeptember 2020July 2022Allow2210NoNo
16977904Syringe Stopper and Plunger Rod Arrangement for a Syringe AssemblySeptember 2020February 2023Allow3011NoNo
17009058Catheter Stabilizing DeviceSeptember 2020April 2023Abandon3220NoYes
16975158CATHETER SECUREMENT DEVICEAugust 2020September 2022Abandon2510NoNo
16997318Shuttle Nib for Control of Stopper During InjectionAugust 2020June 2023Allow3410NoNo
16971115METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECTAL ANAESTHESIAAugust 2020July 2022Allow2301YesNo
16970041Medical Device for Injecting a Composition Provided with a Safety Needle CoverAugust 2020April 2022Allow2010NoNo
16947280CLOSED CIRCUIT DRESSING SYSTEM FOR PICC SITES AND PICC LINESJuly 2020July 2022Allow2320YesNo
16936754COMBINED INFUSION SET AND SENSORJuly 2020August 2022Allow2511YesNo
16771770CONTROL OF EXOGENOUS AGENT CHARACTERISTICS IN MICROBUBBLE-MEDIATED ULTRASOUND PROCEDURESJune 2020April 2024Allow4630YesNo
16891053Personal Hygiene DeviceJune 2020April 2022Allow2320YesNo
16881094GUIDEWIREMay 2020June 2023Abandon3620YesNo
16870516ORAL-HYDRATION SYSTEM, METHOD, AND KITMay 2020March 2023Abandon3401NoNo
16758636JACKETED CATHETER PROBES AND METHODS OF USE FOR INFUSIONApril 2020April 2023Abandon3601NoNo
16836580STRAIN RELIEF AND METHODS OF USE THEREOFMarch 2020November 2022Abandon3220NoNo
16818334METHODS AND DEVICES FOR TRANSCERVICAL TREATMENT OF ENDOMETRIAL CANCER AND HYPERPLASIAMarch 2020August 2022Allow2911YesNo
16812210ACTUATING ELEMENTS FOR BENDING MEDICAL DEVICESMarch 2020April 2022Allow2610NoNo
16643598SURGICAL INSTRUMENT FOR SUCTION AND IRRIGATIONMarch 2020April 2022Allow2510NoNo
16779854PLASTER FOR SECURING A TUBEFebruary 2020March 2022Allow2510NoNo
16750150SMOKE EVACUATING TISSUE GUARD FOR TISSUE REMOVAL AND OTHER SURGICAL PROCEDURESJanuary 2020September 2023Allow4400NoNo
16734906DEVICE FOR CONVEYING BIOLOGICAL MATERIALJanuary 2020October 2022Allow3411NoNo
16732796SKELETAL MUSCLE STIMULATION FOR GLUCOSE CONTROLJanuary 2020November 2023Abandon4630NoNo
16725069DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS AND METHODS WITH PRESSURE SENSITIVE CONTROLDecember 2019August 2022Allow3221YesNo
16625543CATHETER DEVICES WITH BLOOD CONTROL SYSTEMS AND RELATED METHODSDecember 2019November 2022Allow3520YesYes
16697301Removal member for removing a needle protective capNovember 2019May 2022Allow3011NoNo
16688111ISOLATED INTRAVASCULAR TREATMENT WITH PERFUSION BYPASSNovember 2019November 2023Abandon4821YesNo
16613428ENEMA DEVICE FOR WASHING LARGE INTESTINENovember 2019May 2022Abandon3010NoNo
16558768CONFIGURABLE CONTROL HANDLE FOR CATHETERS AND OTHER SURGICAL TOOLSeptember 2019December 2022Allow4020NoNo
16556839CannulaAugust 2019August 2022Allow3610YesNo
16538433SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ANCHORING MEDICAL DEVICESAugust 2019July 2022Allow3510NoNo
16526119Medical Device Position Notification SystemJuly 2019December 2022Abandon4120NoNo
16503384APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR LUBRICATING DEVICES INTRODUCED INTO A BODY OF A PATIENTJuly 2019August 2022Allow3810YesNo
16449290DISPOSABLE NASAL AND EYE WASH DISPENSERJune 2019May 2023Allow4711YesNo
16449072ANNULUS PLANE CATHETERJune 2019October 2022Allow3901YesNo
16468447MULTI-DOSE DISPENSERJune 2019December 2021Allow3010YesNo
16466913FILTER ASSEMBLYJune 2019August 2023Allow5041NoNo
16319609GUIDE WIRE FOR USE IN TUBULAR MEDICAL PROBES, IN PARTICULAR FOR NUTRITIONAL THERAPYJanuary 2019January 2023Abandon4840NoNo
16213510MULTI-FUNCTION CANNULATED SURGICAL DEVICE AND SYSTEMS THEREOFDecember 2018October 2022Abandon4610NoNo
16071428CANNULA AND INFUSION DEVICESJuly 2018February 2022Allow4320YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner STATON, PHOEBE ANNE.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
83.6%
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 STATON, PHOEBE ANNE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner STATON, PHOEBE ANNE works in Art Unit 3783 and has examined 53 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 71.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 32 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner STATON, PHOEBE ANNE's allowance rate of 71.7% places them in the 36% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by STATON, PHOEBE ANNE receive 1.40 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 19% 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 STATON, PHOEBE ANNE is 32 months. This places the examiner in the 53% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +31.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by STATON, PHOEBE ANNE. This interview benefit is in the 78% 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, 35.7% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 81% 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 46.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 71% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 23% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.

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. 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, 33.3% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 21% 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 46% 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:

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.

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.