USPTO Examiner YU HONG - Art Unit 1614

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18928649OPIOID FORMULATIONSOctober 2024March 2025Allow410NoNo
18441413MAGNESIUM BIOTINATE COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF USEFebruary 2024February 2025Allow1201NoNo
18500595OPIOID FORMULATIONSNovember 2023July 2024Allow912NoNo
18500603OPIOID FORMULATIONSNovember 2023June 2025Abandon1920YesYes
18476562BILAYER BIONIC DRUG-LOADED HYDROGEL, AND PREPARATION AND APPLICATION THEREOFSeptember 2023October 2024Abandon1220NoNo
18130706Antimicrobial ArticlesApril 2023April 2025Abandon2521NoNo
18189010COMPOUNDS FOR TREATING OPHTHALMIC DISEASES AND DISORDERSMarch 2023May 2025Allow2621NoNo
18109718ENTERIC AEROBIZATION THERAPYFebruary 2023August 2024Allow1830NoNo
18059108NOVEL COMPOSITION BASED ON POLYCAFFEOYLQUINIC ACIDS, COSMETIC USE THEREOF AND COSMETIC COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING SAMENovember 2022October 2024Abandon2310NoNo
17983784COSMETIC POWDER COMPOSITE AND COSMETIC COMPOSITION CONTAINING SAMENovember 2022April 2025Abandon2921YesNo
17902805PERSONAL CARE COMPOSITIONSSeptember 2022October 2024Allow2620NoNo
17815972STEM CELL STIMULATING COMPOSITIONS AND METHODSJuly 2022January 2025Abandon3041NoNo
17782466Encapsulated fragrance compounds based on natural amino acidsJune 2022July 2025Allow3701NoNo
17749470SUNSCREEN COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING A COMBINATION OF A LINEAR ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION-ABSORBING POLYETHER AND OTHER ULTRAVIOLET-SCREENING COMPOUNDSMay 2022November 2024Allow3040NoNo
17738771Method and System for Increasing Beneficial Bacteria and Decreasing Pathogenic Bacteria in the Oral CavityMay 2022December 2024Allow3111NoNo
17773087STABILIZATION OF DIMPROPYRIDAZ SUSPENSIONS BY TRIETHYLAMMONIUM CHLORIDEApril 2022December 2024Allow3200NoNo
17731534LIPID DEPOT FORMULATIONSApril 2022February 2025Abandon3321NoNo
17768876CHEMICAL MODIFICATION OF SILK FIBROIN FOR FABRICATION OF ENZYMATICALLY CROSSLINKED HYDROGELS WITH TUNABLE GELATION KINETICS AND BIOACTIVITYApril 2022April 2025Allow3610YesNo
17753814DRIFT CONTROL ADJUVANT FORMULATION CONTAINING A SULFOPOLYMERMarch 2022April 2025Abandon3701NoNo
17689506High-Efficiency Transdermal PatchesMarch 2022January 2025Abandon3530NoNo
17612512COMPOSITION COMPRISING SORBITOL OR XYLITOL, AND A GELLING AGENTNovember 2021April 2025Abandon4101NoNo
17501463JAB1 Inhibitory Compositions for Ossification and Methods Related TheretoOctober 2021April 2025Allow4240NoNo
17382893COMPOSITION COMPRISING A UV-SCREENING AGENT, AN ANIONIC CROSSLINKED HYDROPHILIC POLYMER, A SURFACTANT HAVING AN HLB LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 5 AND A SILICONE COPOLYMERJuly 2021November 2024Abandon4041NoNo
17423331DIESTER OF PLANT-BASED 1,3-PROPANEDIOLJuly 2021November 2024Abandon4111NoNo
17415663OIL-IN-WATER COSMETIC AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAMEJune 2021April 2025Abandon4621NoNo
17319325DPP IV INHIBITOR FORMULATIONSMay 2021June 2024Allow3721NoNo
17187512METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS USING SYNTHETIC NANOCARRIERS COMPRISING IMMUNOSUPPRESSANTFebruary 2021February 2025Abandon4711NoNo
17267332EMULSION COSMETICFebruary 2021May 2025Allow5260YesNo
17266567ANTIOXIDANT COMPOSITION COMPRISING NOVEL GINSENOSIDEFebruary 2021October 2024Abandon4420NoNo
16973904PERSONAL CARE FORMULATIONS COMPRISING THICKENED ORGANIC LIQUIDSDecember 2020November 2024Abandon4851NoNo
16982338RAW MATERIAL FOR COSMETIC AND OIL-IN-WATER EMULSION COSMETIC COMPRISING CORE-CORONA POLYMER PARTICLESeptember 2020November 2024Abandon5040YesYes
16975418POROUS BIOMATERIALS FOR TISSUE REGENERATIONAugust 2020November 2024Allow5150NoNo
16909635TABLETS CONTAINING ARGININE AT HIGH CONCENTRATIONJune 2020May 2025Abandon5970YesNo
16954402ANTIMICROBIAL LAYERED MATERIALJune 2020September 2024Allow5141YesNo
16635372Treatment of Mosaic Viruses and Bacterial Infections of PlantsJanuary 2020October 2024Abandon5750NoNo
16306096IMPROVED HAIR CARE COMPOSITIONSNovember 2018March 2020Allow1510NoNo
16035762ENHANCED EFFICIENCY OF SUNSCREEN COMPOSITIONSJuly 2018July 2024Allow6041NoYes
16065952Antifungal AgentJune 2018June 2020Abandon2461YesYes
14818212METHOD OF SELECTING ANTIOXIDANTS FOR USE IN TOPICALLY APPLIED COMPOSITIONSAugust 2015June 2018Allow3540YesYes
13335151METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR TREATING ACNEDecember 2011August 2012Allow720YesNo
13103393HIGH PHOTOSTABILITY SUNSCREEN COMPOSITIONMay 2011August 2013Allow2710NoNo
12879413WATER-INSOLUBLE MEDICINESeptember 2010November 2012Allow2721YesNo
12511800SYNTHESIS OF NANOPARTICLES BY FUNGIJuly 2009January 2013Allow4121NoNo
12169764PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION FOR TOPICAL APPLICATION OF POORLY SOLUBLE COMPOUNDSJuly 2008May 2012Allow4621NoYes
12149058Melt formulaApril 2008May 2013Allow6020NoNo
11722284INFECTION-RESISTANT POLYURETHANE FOAMS, METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME AND USE THEREOF IN ANTISEPTIC WOUND DRESSINGSJune 2007December 2011Allow5421NoYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner YU, HONG.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
3
Examiner Affirmed
2
(66.7%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(33.3%)
Reversal Percentile
48.2%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 33.3% reversal rate, the PTAB reverses the examiner's rejections in a meaningful percentage of cases. This reversal rate is below the USPTO average, indicating that appeals face more challenges here than typical.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
10
Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(30.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
7
(70.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
42.3%
Lower 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, 30.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is below the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal has limited effectiveness in prompting favorable reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner YU, HONG - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner YU, HONG works in Art Unit 1614 and has examined 44 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 54.5%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 37 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner YU, HONG's allowance rate of 54.5% places them in the 10% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by YU, HONG receive 2.55 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 YU, HONG is 37 months. This places the examiner in the 13% 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 +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by YU, HONG. This interview benefit is in the 10% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 21.9% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 18% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 22.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 21% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

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 0% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 62.5% of appeals filed. This is in the 35% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 20.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner shows below-average willingness to reconsider rejections during appeals. Be prepared to fully prosecute appeals if filed.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 25.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 15% 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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 0% percentile). This examiner rarely makes examiner's amendments compared to other examiners. You should expect to make all necessary claim amendments yourself through formal amendment practice.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 0% percentile). This examiner rarely issues Quayle actions compared to other examiners. Allowances typically come directly without a separate action for formal matters.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.
  • 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.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.