Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17256381 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MRT IMAGING WITH MAGNETIC FIELD MODULATION | December 2020 | September 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17114412 | TERAHERTZ FIELD EFFECT NON-INVASIVE BIOFEEDBACK DIAGNOSIS SYSTEM | December 2020 | October 2024 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 15734026 | DETERMINATION OF PARAMETRIZED CHARACTERISTICS OF A TISSUE | December 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 52 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17059622 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ASSESSING A PHYSIOLOGICAL PROPERTY OF A BIOLOGICAL TISSUE BASED ON ITS MICROWAVE TRANSMISSION PROPERTIES | November 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 52 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17079868 | BIOSENSOR AND BIOSENSOR ARRAY AND DEVICE | October 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 40 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16947837 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONDUCTING ON-DEVICE SPIROMETRY TEST | August 2020 | April 2024 | Allow | 44 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16939345 | MEDICAL ASSISTANCE DEVICE | July 2020 | December 2024 | Abandon | 53 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16959746 | COMBINING PH AND METABOLIC ACTIVITY IMAGING FOR RESPONSE ASSESSMENT IN IMMUNE THERAPY | July 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16786801 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONDUCTING ON-DEVICE SPIROMETRY TEST | February 2020 | September 2023 | Allow | 43 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16723121 | ANTIOXIDANT SENSOR AND METHOD OF OBTAINING ANTIOXIDANT SIGNAL | December 2019 | March 2024 | Allow | 51 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16621711 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR SENSING A DENTAL REGION | December 2019 | December 2023 | Abandon | 48 | 3 | 1 | No | No |
| 16575545 | IMPLANTABLE OR INSERTABLE NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANT IMAGING SYSTEM | September 2019 | August 2024 | Allow | 59 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16552474 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR HOME TRANSDERMAL GFR MONITORING | August 2019 | September 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16507405 | APPARATUS, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING SLEEP | July 2019 | November 2024 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 16349570 | VAGINAL ELECTRODE | May 2019 | June 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16346833 | DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING GESTATIONAL AGE | May 2019 | February 2024 | Allow | 58 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16292931 | GUIDEWIRE WITH AN INTEGRATED OPTICAL FIBER | March 2019 | August 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16269520 | INTERLEAVED PHOTON DETECTION ARRAY FOR OPTICALLY MEASURING A PHYSICAL SAMPLE | February 2019 | June 2024 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16222921 | MULTI-FIELD MINIATURIZED MICRO-ENDOSCOPE | December 2018 | April 2024 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16308951 | Ultrasonic Imaging Device and Operation Method Thereof | December 2018 | April 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | No | No |
| 16093524 | MEMBRANE-BASED FOOT IMAGING APPARATUS INCLUDING A CAMERA FOR MONITORING FOOT POSITIONING | October 2018 | February 2024 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16154002 | COMPACT ANTENNA ARRANGEMENT OF RADAR SYSTEM FOR DETECTING INTERNAL ORGAN MOTION | October 2018 | January 2025 | Abandon | 60 | 9 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16071174 | USER TERMINAL AND CONTROL METHOD OF THE SAME | July 2018 | November 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16070173 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TAKING A SAMPLE FROM A FLUID-CONDUCTING SYSTEM | July 2018 | September 2024 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 15977091 | PROBABILITY MAP-BASED ULTRASOUND SCANNING | May 2018 | September 2024 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 15971966 | Catheter Splines as Location Sensors | May 2018 | December 2023 | Allow | 60 | 4 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 15332567 | IMAGING ABNORMALITIES IN VASCULAR RESPONSE | October 2016 | August 2023 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 2 | Yes | No |
| 14631906 | MARKING DEVICE WITH RETRACTABLE CANNULA | February 2015 | March 2019 | Allow | 49 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 14354679 | COLOR ULTRASOUND SYSTEM AND METHOD AND DEVICE THEREOF FOR OBTAINING BEAM-FORMING LINE DATA | August 2014 | June 2019 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 12802431 | VASCULAR ULTRASOUND INTIMA-MEDIA THICKNESS (IMT) MEASUREMENT SYSTEM | June 2010 | September 2012 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 11597325 | ULTRASONOGRAPHIC DEVICE FOR PERFORMING LUMINANCE CORRECTION | September 2008 | September 2012 | Allow | 60 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 12094195 | METHOD FOR CREATING A MODEL OF A STRUCTURE | May 2008 | September 2012 | Allow | 52 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 10553770 | APPARATUS FOR ANGIOGRAPHIC X-RAY PHOTOGRAPHY | June 2006 | March 2009 | Allow | 41 | 2 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 10519885 | ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS AND ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS CONTROL METHOD | December 2004 | April 2008 | Allow | 40 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 10439123 | LOCAL COIL ARRANGEMENT FOR A MAGNETIC RESONANCE SYSTEM | May 2003 | July 2008 | Allow | 60 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BOR, HELENE CATHERINE.
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, 66.7% 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.
✓ Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
Examiner BOR, HELENE CATHERINE works in Art Unit 3797 and has examined 35 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 77.1%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 59 months.
Examiner BOR, HELENE CATHERINE's allowance rate of 77.1% places them in the 46% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by BOR, HELENE CATHERINE receive 3.14 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 86% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by BOR, HELENE CATHERINE is 59 months. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +12.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by BOR, HELENE CATHERINE. This interview benefit is in the 48% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 26.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 45% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 20.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 27% 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.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 100% 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.
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's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 8.6% of allowed cases (in the 92% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.
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.