Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17117731 | CLOSED-LOOP TOOL CONTROL FOR ORTHOPEDIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES | December 2020 | January 2025 | Abandon | 49 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17101254 | MEDICAL IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS | November 2020 | January 2025 | Allow | 50 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17080467 | Adaptive Selection of Ultrasound Frequency | October 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 36 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17079274 | ULTRASOUND IMAGING METHOD AND ULTRASOUND IMAGING DEVICE | October 2020 | June 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17079118 | IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, AND IMAGE PROCESSING PROGRAM | October 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 53 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17039062 | DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR IMAGING WITHIN A BODY LUMEN | September 2020 | January 2024 | Allow | 40 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 17030026 | Probe Shield | September 2020 | March 2025 | Allow | 54 | 7 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 17025622 | MULTI-FREQUENCY MAPPING CATHETER AND METHOD OF MAPPING | September 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 37 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16979964 | BREAST ULTRASOUND WORKFLOW APPLICATION | September 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 48 | 5 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16964249 | A method for Preparing an Insertion Site for a Cannula on a Skin of a Patient, a Skin Cover Unit Therefore and Its Use | July 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 41 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16922204 | ENDOVASCULAR OCCLUSION DEVICE AND METHOD OF USE | July 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 49 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16905873 | ULTRASONIC ENDOSCOPE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF ULTRASONIC ENDOSCOPE | June 2020 | April 2024 | Allow | 46 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16894421 | Pattern Interference Radiation Force (PIRF) neural stimulators | June 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 16879519 | DUAL LAYER ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER | May 2020 | August 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16641671 | ABLATION CATHETER, CATHETER ARRANGEMENT AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING ABLATIVE TREATMENT | February 2020 | May 2024 | Abandon | 51 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16795220 | IDENTIFICATION OF RESPIRATORY PHASES IN A MEDICAL PROCEDURE | February 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 52 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16631802 | RF Based Monitoring Of User Activity | January 2020 | February 2025 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16625104 | METHOD FOR PROCESSING ULTRASONIC IMAGE | December 2019 | June 2024 | Abandon | 54 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16623974 | ASSEMBLY FOR IMAGING AND/OR TREATING BRAIN TISSUE | December 2019 | May 2024 | Allow | 53 | 5 | 0 | No | No |
| 16662595 | INTRALUMINAL ULTRASOUND NAVIGATION GUIDANCE AND ASSOCIATED DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS | October 2019 | October 2024 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16565219 | Ultrasound Transducer Array Architecture And Method of Manufacture | September 2019 | June 2024 | Allow | 57 | 5 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16477060 | STRETCHABLE ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER DEVICES | July 2019 | March 2025 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16475675 | LOCALIZED MAGNETIC FIELD GENERATOR | July 2019 | January 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16369783 | MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS APPARATUS, MEDICAL IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD | March 2019 | February 2024 | Abandon | 59 | 7 | 0 | No | No |
| 16336544 | ELECTRICAL GROUNDING FOR IMAGING ASSEMBLY AND ASSOCIATED INTRALUMINAL DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS | March 2019 | December 2023 | Allow | 57 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16267833 | SURGICAL ROBOT PLATFORM | February 2019 | May 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 16266442 | System and Method for a Wearable Vital Signs Monitor | February 2019 | January 2024 | Allow | 60 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner FANG, MICHAEL YIMING.
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 FANG, MICHAEL YIMING works in Art Unit 3798 and has examined 27 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 66.7%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.
Examiner FANG, MICHAEL YIMING's allowance rate of 66.7% places them in the 30% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by FANG, MICHAEL YIMING receive 4.93 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 98% 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 FANG, MICHAEL YIMING is 53 months. This places the examiner in the 5% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +8.2% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by FANG, MICHAEL YIMING. This interview benefit is in the 38% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 13.2% 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 12.9% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 15% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 100% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 100% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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.
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 54% 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.