Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17254996 | ULTRASOUND-GUIDED ASSISTANCE DEVICE AND SYSTEM FOR NEEDLE | December 2020 | December 2023 | Abandon | 36 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 17064928 | INTRACARDIAC CATHETER DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF | October 2020 | December 2024 | Abandon | 50 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17002793 | RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, AND RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE PROCESSING PROGRAM | August 2020 | March 2025 | Abandon | 55 | 4 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16960306 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IN VIVO DETECTION OF ADIPOSE TISSUE BROWNING | July 2020 | March 2024 | Abandon | 45 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 15733200 | Surgical Navigation System For Registering Coordinates of Patient-Customized Tool | June 2020 | February 2024 | Abandon | 44 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16788499 | Cardiogram Measurements | February 2020 | April 2024 | Allow | 50 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16779178 | MOTION, COMPRESSION, AND POSITIONING CORRECTIONS IN MEDICAL IMAGING | January 2020 | September 2024 | Allow | 56 | 4 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16703481 | Dual-Mode Ultrasonic Assessment of Bone | December 2019 | November 2023 | Allow | 47 | 3 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16421311 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ASSESSMENT OF NEURO-INFLAMMATION USING MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING (MRI) | May 2019 | January 2025 | Allow | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16316415 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REMOTE DETECTION OF CARDIAC CONDITION | January 2019 | May 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 16303682 | MEDICAL OBSERVATION DEVICE, SUCH AS A MICROSCOPE OR AN ENDOSCOPE, AND METHOD USING A PSEUDO-COLOR PATTERN HAVING TEMPORAL AND/OR SPATIAL MODULATION | November 2018 | March 2024 | Abandon | 60 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16100429 | IVUS AND EXTERNAL IMAGING TO MAP ANEURYSM TO DETERMINE PLACEMENT OF COILS AND LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS | August 2018 | March 2024 | Allow | 60 | 5 | 0 | No | Yes |
| 16100667 | REAL-TIME MONITORING OF FLUID FLOW WITH FLOW SENSING ELEMENT IN AN ANUERYSM AND ASSOCIATED DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS | August 2018 | March 2024 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner KOLKIN, ADAM D..
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, 50.0% 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 KOLKIN, ADAM D. works in Art Unit 3798 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 46.2%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 55 months.
Examiner KOLKIN, ADAM D.'s allowance rate of 46.2% places them in the 11% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.
On average, applications examined by KOLKIN, ADAM D. receive 3.69 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 94% 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 KOLKIN, ADAM D. is 55 months. This places the examiner in the 4% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a +38.1% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by KOLKIN, ADAM D.. This interview benefit is in the 85% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 5.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 3% 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 30.8% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 46% 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.
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.
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.