Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17121815 | TAILORED LASER PULSES FOR SURGICAL APPLICATIONS | December 2020 | September 2023 | Allow | 33 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 15734596 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING A DEFIBRILLATOR | December 2020 | November 2023 | Allow | 36 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17108862 | TRANSDURAL ELECTRODE DEVICE FOR STIMULATION OF THE SPINAL CORD | December 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 37 | 0 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17104701 | ELECTRONIC DEVICE, METHOD AND STORAGE MEDIUM | November 2020 | September 2023 | Allow | 34 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17100455 | CONTROL PULSES AND POSTURE FOR ECAPS | November 2020 | January 2024 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17048293 | DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SUPPORTING DETECTION OF RETURN OF SPONTANEOUS CIRCULATION DURING CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION | October 2020 | October 2024 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17016020 | DETECTING THE END OF CARDIO MACHINE ACTIVITIES ON A WEARABLE DEVICE | September 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16977491 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MONITORING A HUMAN OR ANIMAL SUBJECT | September 2020 | February 2024 | Abandon | 41 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16975010 | Wearable Health Device System with Normalized Seismocardiography Signals | August 2020 | March 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16969114 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CLIENT-SIDE PHYSIOLOGICAL CONDITION ESTIMATIONS BASED ON A VIDEO OF AN INDIVIDUAL | August 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 38 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16916505 | SLEEP INTERVENTION EQUIPMENT, SYSTEM AND METHOD | June 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16758679 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MEASURING BIO-INFORMATION | April 2020 | December 2024 | Abandon | 56 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16726334 | Device-Based Maneuver and Activity State-Based Physiologic Status Monitoring | December 2019 | October 2023 | Allow | 46 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16128487 | Flashing Light Therapy with Image Presentation and Interaction for Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia | September 2018 | December 2021 | Abandon | 40 | 3 | 1 | No | Yes |
| 15587131 | MEDICAL APPLICATIONS USING TUNABLE METAMATERIAL SYSTEMS AND METHODS | May 2017 | June 2019 | Allow | 25 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15048520 | Carbon-Based Surface Plasmon Source And Applications Thereof | February 2016 | June 2019 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner LAU, MICHAEL J.
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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.
⚠ Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.
Examiner LAU, MICHAEL J works in Art Unit 3796 and has examined 16 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 62.5%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 40 months.
Examiner LAU, MICHAEL J's allowance rate of 62.5% places them in the 24% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by LAU, MICHAEL J receive 2.06 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 50% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by LAU, MICHAEL J is 40 months. This places the examiner in the 25% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +15.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LAU, MICHAEL J. This interview benefit is in the 55% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 13.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 10% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 28.6% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 42% 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.
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 24% 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.
When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 100% 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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 48% 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 53% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions more often than average when claims are allowable but formal matters remain (MPEP § 714.14).
Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:
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.