Each year, Juristat publishes our annual rankings of the best firms in each technology center at the USPTO. This year, the rankings reveal exciting shifts in performance and the continued dominance of some top performers.

All IP firms want to be able to clearly and effectively show the positive impact of their work on their client’s patent portfolios.  

Will an interview lead to an allowance? Should you appeal? Is it time to abandon? How long is too long between filing and the first office action? As an experienced patent professional, you know that predicting examiner behavior is key to finding the shortest path to an allowance, but without the right data, you’re just guessing.

With the right data, IP practitioners can make nuanced and strategic decisions to aid their patent prosecution process.

Having insight into which examiners issue the most OAs can help you decide whether an application is worth pursuing, therefore providing you and your client with the information needed to persist confidently.

As a seasoned patent professional, it is likely that most of your work falls into a specific technology center, meaning you probably find yourself in front of the same examiners time and again. 

If you find yourself in front of an examiner with a high allowance rate, first, breathe a sigh of relief. Then, consider the next steps in your prosecution strategy. 

When it comes to patent prosecution, knowing your examiner’s allowance rate can give you a great insight into the road that lies ahead. 

Juristat’s normalized allowance rate factors in both average examiner allowance rate and the USPTO average allowance rate to provide a more specific metric to evaluate your patent prosecution strategy.

If you knew your assigned USPTO examiner was going to procrastinate on your application, how would it impact your prosecution strategy?