PATLY.AIExaminer difficulty
How examiners in this art unit compare
The spread of examiners on each measure. Click a bar to see who is in it.
3-year grant rate
81%
+13 pts vs tech center 3600 allowed within 3 years of the first action
Allowance rate
83%
+12 pts vs tech center 3600 range 82% to 83%
Rejections before allowance
1.4
−0.1 vs tech center 3600
Months to first action
16.9 mo
−1.5 vs tech center 3600
In plain words
With Art unit 3667, 81% of applications were allowed within three years of the first office action, against 68% for tech center 3600. The first action takes 16.9 months on average.
Timeline
Applications by filing year: drag across the years to study a period
Allowed in green, abandoned in red, pending in grey. The figures above and every chart that can be recomputed by filing year follow the span you pick; the rest are marked all years.
Ask the record
Questions practitioners ask, answered from 16,244 applications
Grant rate from the first action
Share allowed, by months after the first office action
The gold line is this record and the blue line is tech center 3600. The marker is the three-year grant rate.
Outcome simulator
Where you are, what you do next, and the odds that follow
A model of this record’s own transitions: each examiner action, the response to it, and what came next. Thin data borrows from tech center 3600.
Prosecution paths
How prosecution actually unfolds
Every application’s sequence of examiner actions, from the first action to the outcome. Hover a band for the count.
Compared with peers
Against the art unit, the tech center and the USPTO
The same figures for this record, tech center 3600, the tech center and the whole office.
Allowance over time
How fast applications are allowed, or abandoned
Share allowed (gold) and abandoned (red) by month since filing, with pending cases counted only while they are pending.
Rejection fingerprint
What gets rejected, by statute
Share of office actions raising each ground; blue is tech center 3600.
What works
Allowance by strategy used
Allowance rate among decided cases where each move was used at least once, against tech center 3600.
Interviews
Does an interview help?
Allowance with and without an examiner interview, and how often interviews happen.
Odds by round
Chance the next action is an allowance
After the first, second and later rejections.
Response clock
Days from a response to the next action
How long the examiner takes to act once you have answered.
Quarter-end timing
When allowances land in the fiscal quarter
Allowances by week of the USPTO fiscal quarter. An even spread would put 15% in the last two weeks.
Appeals
What happens on appeal
Appeals filed, briefs, examiner’s answers, and how the Board decided.
Trend
Allowance rate by filing year
Is it getting easier or harder? Gold is this record, blue is tech center 3600.
Who files here
Assignees and firms with the most applications
How often each one was allowed with this unit.
Landscape
Examiners across tech center 3600
Each dot is an examiner: allowance rate across, rejections before allowance down, size by caseload. Click one to open it.
Examiners
Every examiner in the unit, ranked by difficulty
| Examiner | Applications | Allowance rate | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ali Bakkar | 2 | 0% | P99 |
| Selena Meng Jin | 179 | 47% | P96 Harder than peers |
| Ibrahim Abdoalatif Alsomairy | 158 | 40% | P96 Harder than peers |
| Moises Gasca Alva Jr | 116 | 48% | P95 Harder than peers |
| Ashleigh Nicole Turnbaugh | 109 | 56% | P88 Harder than peers |
| John D Holman | 149 | 62% | P86 Harder than peers |
| David Ruben Pedersen | 179 | 61% | P85 Harder than peers |
| Reece Anthony Wakely | 66 | 29% | P81 Harder than peers |
| Dana Ferren Artimez | 162 | 60% | P80 Harder than peers |
| Farhad Dawodi | 27 | 41% | P80 |
| Carville Albert Hollingsworth IV | 64 | 63% | P78 Harder than peers |
| Michael Todd Lukon | 20 | 50% | P73 |
| Austin Robert Chennault | 33 | 55% | P73 Typical for peers |
| Kyle Kahung Tsui | 16 | 50% | P71 |
| James P Trammell | 44 | 48% | P69 Typical for peers |
| Jerrah Edwards | 409 | 67% | P65 Typical for peers |
| Andrew J Cromer | 448 | 76% | P65 Typical for peers |
| Godfrey Aleksander Maciorowski | 183 | 65% | P63 Typical for peers |
| Wenyuan Yang | 212 | 72% | P59 Typical for peers |
| Sahar Motazedi | 310 | 67% | P57 Typical for peers |
| Abdalla A Khaled | 331 | 73% | P53 Typical for peers |
| Jeffrey Robert Chalhoub | 224 | 71% | P50 Typical for peers |
| Majdi A Alsomiri | 347 | 79% | P49 Typical for peers |
| David A Testardi | 768 | 75% | P43 Typical for peers |
| Dominick Anthony Chir Mulder | 163 | 72% | P42 Typical for peers |
| Tabitha Lynn Kress | 54 | 80% | P38 Typical for peers |
| Elle Rose Knudson | 60 | 69% | P37 Typical for peers |
| Kathleen B Ward | 19 | 68% | P35 |
| Joshua Jeffrey Penko | 59 | 69% | P32 Typical for peers |
| Rachid Bendidi | 572 | 82% | P26 Typical for peers |
| Kenneth J Malkowski | 838 | 79% | P25 Easier than peers |
| Andrew James Trettel | 9 | 67% | P24 |
| Tamara L Weber | 717 | 88% | P18 Easier than peers |
| Babar Sarwar | 1,192 | 88% | P16 Easier than peers |
| Labibah Ilma Ali | 37 | 86% | P15 Easier than peers |
| Kenny Abel Taveras | 73 | 88% | P15 Easier than peers |
| Michael Dean Lang | 888 | 88% | P13 Easier than peers |
| James E Stroud | 361 | 87% | P13 Easier than peers |
| Anne Marie Antonucci | 724 | 89% | P12 Easier than peers |
| Rodney Allen Butler | 1,251 | 89% | P11 Easier than peers |
| Yuen H Wong | 1,010 | 90% | P5 Easier than peers |
| McDieunel Marc | 1,715 | 94% | P4 Easier than peers |
| Thanh V Nguyen | 3 | 100% | P2 |