USPTO Examiner WANG RUIXUE - Art Unit 1672

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19178522BACTERIOPHAGE COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATMENT OF BACTERIAL INFECTIONSApril 2025November 2025Allow710NoNo
18332612Cells selected for high mitochondria and/or reactive oxygen species for use as packaging cells for gene theraphy vectors and viral vaccinesJune 2023January 2026Abandon3142YesNo
18324475METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROCESSING A NUCLEIC ACID SAMPLEMay 2023December 2025Abandon3050YesNo
18298529GENE THERAPIES FOR LYSOSOMAL DISORDERSApril 2023November 2025Allow3100NoNo
17980200NASAL-SPRAY SAMPLINGNovember 2022March 2026Abandon4011YesNo
17888131VACCINES AND USES THEREOF TO INDUCE AN IMMUNE RESPONSE TO SARS-COV2August 2022August 2025Allow3600YesNo
17760227VIRUS-FREE CELL CULTURESAugust 2022December 2025Abandon4001NoNo
17783120METHODS FOR TREATING BACTERIAL INFECTIONSJune 2022January 2026Abandon4401NoNo
17770641CHIMERIC POLYPEPTIDES AND USES THEREOFApril 2022February 2026Allow4620NoNo
17762472COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR IMPROVING DETECTION OF BIOMOLECULES IN BIOFLUID SAMPLESMarch 2022February 2026Allow4711NoNo
17638630COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATMENT OF INFLUENZA A INFECTIONFebruary 2022March 2026Allow4810NoNo
17637829ANTIBODIES AND THE USES THEREOFFebruary 2022November 2025Abandon4501NoNo
17629592SINGLE PLASMID VECTOR SYSTEM FOR PACKAGING RECOMBINANT HUMAN ADENOVIRUS TYPE 4 AND APPLICATION THEREOFJanuary 2022September 2025Allow4410NoNo
17596401COMBINATION OF HEPATITIS B VIRUS (HBV) VACCINES AND DIHYDROPYRIMIDINE DERIVATIVES AS CAPSID ASSEMBLY MODULATORSDecember 2021November 2025Abandon4801NoNo
17611564PEPTIDE VACCINE BASED ON A NEW UNIVERSAL INFLUENZA A HEMAGGLUTININ HEAD DOMAIN EPITOPE AND HUMAN MONOCLONAL ANTIBODIES BINDING THERETONovember 2021August 2025Allow4520YesNo
17594113MULTIPLEX COMPETITION ASSAY FOR PROFILING BINDING EPITOPES OF AFFINITY AGENTS FOR CLINICAL DIAGNOSTICS USEOctober 2021November 2025Allow4911YesNo
17472268Enhancing Immunity Using Chimeric CD40 Ligand and Coronavirus VaccineSeptember 2021January 2026Abandon5251YesNo
17314983METHOD OF DETECTING PATHOGENS AND/OR ANTIGENS IN SAMPLESMay 2021November 2025Abandon5521NoNo
17291906COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS OF INDUCING DIFFERENTIATION OF A HAIR CELLMay 2021February 2026Abandon5740NoNo
17236213HUMAN MEDICAL PROPHYLAXIS OF CORONAVIRIDAE PATHOGENIC INFECTION BY TOPICAL APPLICATION OF IMMUNE CORONAVIRIDAE IMMUNOGLOBULIN AApril 2021November 2025Abandon5541YesNo
17275310Anti-HIV Antibody 10-1074 VariantsMarch 2021May 2025Allow5022YesNo
16942156ADENOVIRUS-ASSOCIATED VIRUSES SEPARATION METHODJuly 2020October 2025Abandon6020NoYes

Appeals Overview

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
1
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
1.2%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
1.0%
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, 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.

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 WANG, RUIXUE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner WANG, RUIXUE works in Art Unit 1672 and has examined 9 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 33.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 52 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner WANG, RUIXUE's allowance rate of 33.3% places them in the 5% 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 WANG, RUIXUE receive 2.44 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 71% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by WANG, RUIXUE is 52 months. This places the examiner in the 3% 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 +60.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by WANG, RUIXUE. This interview benefit is in the 97% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 12.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 7% 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 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 49% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 0.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 0% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 71% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 3% 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 3% 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.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.