USPTO Examiner RHEE KELSEY - Art Unit 3785

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19269085HYDROTHERAPY MACHINEJuly 2025October 2025Allow300NoNo
18073587AUTOMATIC MASSAGE PORTABLE MASSAGE TABLEDecember 2022August 2025Abandon3310NoNo
17927121RESPIRATOR MASKNovember 2022February 2026Abandon3910NoNo
17989487SUPPORT FOOT FOR AN EXOSKELETON FOR CARRYING LOADS, EXOSKELETON COMPRISING SAID SUPPORT FOOT AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING AN EXOSKELETONNovember 2022February 2026Abandon3910NoNo
17972543ELECTRIC STRETCHING DEVICEOctober 2022January 2026Abandon3910NoNo
17916846RESPIRATORY AIR DISINFECTION DEVICE, RESPIRATORY PROTECTION MASK WITH SAME AND RESPIRATORY AIR DISINFECTION METHOD WITH SAMEOctober 2022January 2026Abandon4010NoNo
17907519FACE MASK APPARATUS WITH SECONDARY FILTERSeptember 2022January 2026Abandon3910NoNo
17889247APPARATUS FOR ASSISTING MUSCULAR STRENGTHAugust 2022February 2026Allow4210NoNo
17864355CLUTCH ADAPTED FOR EXOSKELETON AND ANKLE JOINT ASSISTED EXOSKELETONJuly 2022September 2025Allow3800NoNo
17791530Stationary automated device for lower limb rehabilitationJuly 2022March 2026Abandon4410NoNo
17757754BALANCE DEVICE WITH PIVOTABLE PLATEJune 2022December 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17824466CPR CHEST COMPRESSION MACHINEMay 2022November 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17737811GENERATING SETTINGS FOR VENTILATORS USING MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUESMay 2022December 2025Abandon4410NoNo
17721437FACIAL PROTECTION ELEMENT FOR PROTECTION AGAINST RISKS OF EXPOSURE TO INFECTIOUS BIOLOGICAL AGENTSApril 2022October 2025Abandon4310NoNo
17659000WALKING TRAINING SYSTEM, CONTROL METHOD THEREOF, AND CONTROL PROGRAMApril 2022September 2025Allow4110NoNo
17701850COMPRESSION DEVICE AND METHOD OF USEMarch 2022October 2025Abandon4310NoNo
17697394FASCIAL GUN HAVING FUNCTION OF INTELLIGENTLY ADJUSTING STRIKINGMarch 2022October 2025Allow4311NoNo
17655087BREATHING CONTROL DEVICEMarch 2022September 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17753543METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR CONTROLLING OXYGEN DELIVERY IN A FLOW THERAPY APPARATUSMarch 2022January 2025Allow3500NoNo
17639072NASAL SPRAY MEDICAMENT TRAINING DEVICEFebruary 2022October 2025Allow4310YesNo
17583708MASK APPARATUSJanuary 2022July 2025Allow4110NoNo
17579234TELEKINETIC BIONIC GLOVE ASSEMBLYJanuary 2022April 2025Allow3810NoNo
17519231Ear Mounted Cannular Nasal Breathing FilterNovember 2021February 2025Allow3910YesNo
17453267FACE PROTECTION MASKNovember 2021September 2025Abandon4620NoNo
17511690Vibrating Garment to Reduce Muscle Pain During Intense ExerciseOctober 2021March 2025Abandon4110NoNo
17509420Rechargeable Hoseless CPAP SystemOctober 2021April 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17508765CPR DEVICE WITH PIVOTING SUPPORT ARMOctober 2021October 2025Allow4730YesNo
17498223Disposable Masks with Improved Life SpanOctober 2021February 2025Abandon4001NoNo

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 RHEE, KELSEY - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner RHEE, KELSEY works in Art Unit 3785 and has examined 6 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 33.3%, 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 RHEE, KELSEY's allowance rate of 33.3% places them in the 5% 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 RHEE, KELSEY receive 1.33 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 RHEE, KELSEY 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 +100.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RHEE, KELSEY. This interview benefit is in the 100% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 4% 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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 47% 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 49% 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.