USPTO Examiner BOR HELENE CATHERINE - Art Unit 3797

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17256381METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MRT IMAGING WITH MAGNETIC FIELD MODULATIONDecember 2020September 2024Abandon4420NoNo
17114412TERAHERTZ FIELD EFFECT NON-INVASIVE BIOFEEDBACK DIAGNOSIS SYSTEMDecember 2020October 2024Allow4630NoNo
15734026DETERMINATION OF PARAMETRIZED CHARACTERISTICS OF A TISSUEDecember 2020March 2025Allow5220YesNo
17059622SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ASSESSING A PHYSIOLOGICAL PROPERTY OF A BIOLOGICAL TISSUE BASED ON ITS MICROWAVE TRANSMISSION PROPERTIESNovember 2020March 2025Allow5221YesNo
17079868BIOSENSOR AND BIOSENSOR ARRAY AND DEVICEOctober 2020February 2024Allow4030YesNo
16947837SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONDUCTING ON-DEVICE SPIROMETRY TESTAugust 2020April 2024Allow4410YesNo
16939345MEDICAL ASSISTANCE DEVICEJuly 2020December 2024Abandon5331YesNo
16959746COMBINING PH AND METABOLIC ACTIVITY IMAGING FOR RESPONSE ASSESSMENT IN IMMUNE THERAPYJuly 2020September 2024Allow5020NoNo
16786801SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONDUCTING ON-DEVICE SPIROMETRY TESTFebruary 2020September 2023Allow4320YesNo
16723121ANTIOXIDANT SENSOR AND METHOD OF OBTAINING ANTIOXIDANT SIGNALDecember 2019March 2024Allow5121YesNo
16621711METHOD AND DEVICE FOR SENSING A DENTAL REGIONDecember 2019December 2023Abandon4831NoNo
16575545IMPLANTABLE OR INSERTABLE NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANT IMAGING SYSTEMSeptember 2019August 2024Allow5940YesNo
16552474SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR HOME TRANSDERMAL GFR MONITORINGAugust 2019September 2024Abandon6031YesNo
16507405APPARATUS, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING SLEEPJuly 2019November 2024Allow6030NoNo
16349570VAGINAL ELECTRODEMay 2019June 2024Abandon6020NoNo
16346833DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING GESTATIONAL AGEMay 2019February 2024Allow5831YesNo
16292931GUIDEWIRE WITH AN INTEGRATED OPTICAL FIBERMarch 2019August 2024Allow6050YesNo
16269520INTERLEAVED PHOTON DETECTION ARRAY FOR OPTICALLY MEASURING A PHYSICAL SAMPLEFebruary 2019June 2024Allow6081YesNo
16222921MULTI-FIELD MINIATURIZED MICRO-ENDOSCOPEDecember 2018April 2024Allow6031YesNo
16308951Ultrasonic Imaging Device and Operation Method ThereofDecember 2018April 2024Abandon6041NoNo
16093524MEMBRANE-BASED FOOT IMAGING APPARATUS INCLUDING A CAMERA FOR MONITORING FOOT POSITIONINGOctober 2018February 2024Allow6030YesNo
16154002COMPACT ANTENNA ARRANGEMENT OF RADAR SYSTEM FOR DETECTING INTERNAL ORGAN MOTIONOctober 2018January 2025Abandon6091YesNo
16071174USER TERMINAL AND CONTROL METHOD OF THE SAMEJuly 2018November 2024Abandon6041YesNo
16070173APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TAKING A SAMPLE FROM A FLUID-CONDUCTING SYSTEMJuly 2018September 2024Allow6040YesNo
15977091PROBABILITY MAP-BASED ULTRASOUND SCANNINGMay 2018September 2024Allow6061YesNo
15971966Catheter Splines as Location SensorsMay 2018December 2023Allow6041YesYes
15332567IMAGING ABNORMALITIES IN VASCULAR RESPONSEOctober 2016August 2023Allow6052YesNo
14631906MARKING DEVICE WITH RETRACTABLE CANNULAFebruary 2015March 2019Allow4930NoNo
14354679COLOR ULTRASOUND SYSTEM AND METHOD AND DEVICE THEREOF FOR OBTAINING BEAM-FORMING LINE DATAAugust 2014June 2019Allow6020NoNo
12802431VASCULAR ULTRASOUND INTIMA-MEDIA THICKNESS (IMT) MEASUREMENT SYSTEMJune 2010September 2012Allow2710NoNo
11597325ULTRASONOGRAPHIC DEVICE FOR PERFORMING LUMINANCE CORRECTIONSeptember 2008September 2012Allow6010NoNo
12094195METHOD FOR CREATING A MODEL OF A STRUCTUREMay 2008September 2012Allow5220NoYes
10553770APPARATUS FOR ANGIOGRAPHIC X-RAY PHOTOGRAPHYJune 2006March 2009Allow4120NoYes
10519885ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS AND ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS CONTROL METHODDecember 2004April 2008Allow4020YesNo
10439123LOCAL COIL ARRANGEMENT FOR A MAGNETIC RESONANCE SYSTEMMay 2003July 2008Allow6020YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner BOR, HELENE CATHERINE.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(66.7%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(33.3%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
92.6%
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, 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.

Strategic Recommendations

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 - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

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.

Allowance Patterns

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.

Office Action Patterns

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.

Prosecution Timeline

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.

Interview Effectiveness

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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

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.

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 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).

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • 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.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

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.