USPTO Examiner HO RUAY L - Art Unit 2142

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18822974AUTOMATIC SNAPSHOT SELECTION AND ZONE CREATIONSeptember 2024February 2025Allow610NoNo
18399326PROGRESS ADJUSTMENT METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUMDecember 2023November 2024Allow1020YesNo
18395167MANAGEMENT OF LOCAL AND REMOTE MEDIA ITEMSDecember 2023January 2025Abandon1310YesNo
18391175VIDEO GENERATION METHOD, APPARATUS, SYSTEM, DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUMDecember 2023February 2025Allow1430YesNo
18222394OMNIDIRECTIONAL GESTURE DETECTIONJuly 2023September 2025Abandon2640YesYes
181541443D Interactions with Web ContentJanuary 2023June 2025Abandon2940YesYes
17985435SYSTEM AND METHOD FACILITATING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENT COMPUTER-SIMULATED ENVIRONMENTSNovember 2022January 2025Allow2600NoNo
17822825MANAGEMENT OF COLLABORATION SETTINGS IN A HETEROGENOUS COMPUTING PLATFORMAugust 2022April 2025Allow3110NoNo
17887371NAVIGATION AND VIEW SHARING SYSTEM FOR REMOTE COLLABORATIONAugust 2022August 2024Allow2420YesNo
17796714COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, TRANSMISSION APPARATUS, RECEPTION APPARATUS, MATRIX GENERATION APPARATUS, COMMUNICATION METHOD, TRANSMISSION METHOD, RECEPTION METHOD, MATRIX GENERATION METHOD AND RECORDING MEDIUMAugust 2022July 2025Allow3500NoNo
17805293MEASURE FACTORYJune 2022November 2024Abandon3040NoNo
17663728MODEL OPTIMIZATION AND STABILIZATION USING QUANTUM COMPUTINGMay 2022May 2025Allow3600NoNo
17695910INTERACTIVE CHANNELMarch 2022March 2025Abandon3640YesNo
17574301QUANTUM STATE TRANSFERJanuary 2022February 2025Allow3700NoNo
17574262Fragment Management Method and Fragment Management ApparatusJanuary 2022October 2024Allow3350YesNo
17622914DETERMINATION DEVICE, DETERMINATION METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUMDecember 2021May 2025Allow4110NoNo
17646088CREATING SATISFICING PLANNERS WITH DEEP LEARNINGDecember 2021June 2025Allow4210YesNo
17530801METHOD FOR MODEL DEPLOYMENT, TERMINAL DEVICE, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUMNovember 2021September 2025Abandon4610NoNo
17492254MEASURE FACTORYOctober 2021November 2024Abandon3840YesNo
17489100METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRAINING MODELSeptember 2021August 2025Abandon4710NoNo
17429687DATA CAPTURE AND TRANSFORMATION TO SUPPORT DATA ANALYSIS AND MACHINE LEARNING FOR SUBSTRATE MANUFACTURING SYSTEMSAugust 2021April 2025Allow4420YesNo
17397384TIMES SERIES MODEL EXPLAINABILITYAugust 2021February 2025Allow4210NoNo
17391384ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING WATCH FACE OF SMART WATCH AND OPERATION METHOD THEREFORAugust 2021November 2024Allow4070YesNo
17378853SIMULATING QUANTUM CIRCUITS ON A COMPUTER USING HIERARCHICAL STORAGEJuly 2021March 2025Allow4410NoNo
17423223MEMORY NETWORK METHOD BASED ON AUTOMATIC ADDRESSING AND RECURSIVE INFORMATION INTEGRATIONJuly 2021December 2024Allow4110YesNo
17370524SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VISION-AND-LANGUAGE REPRESENTATION LEARNINGJuly 2021December 2024Allow4110NoNo
17368102IDENTIFYING RELATED MESSAGES IN A NATURAL LANGUAGE INTERACTION IN MULTIPLE ITERATIONSJuly 2021May 2025Allow4630YesNo
17348609MULTI-SPATIAL OVERVIEW MODEJune 2021September 2025Allow5140NoYes
17325072MAPPING INTERFACE FOR MOBILE ROBOTSMay 2021January 2025Allow4440YesNo
17321226USER TAG GENERATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND COMPUTER DEVICEMay 2021November 2024Allow4210YesNo
17317920METHOD AND A SYSTEM FOR APPLYING MACHINE LEARNING TO AN APPLICATIONMay 2021September 2025Abandon5230YesNo
17210157GRAPH NEURAL NETWORKS FOR DATASETS WITH HETEROPHILYMarch 2021October 2024Allow4310NoNo
17207746METHOD OF GENERATING MODEL AND INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICEMarch 2021November 2024Abandon4410NoNo
17277105END-TO-END LEARNING IN COMMUNICATION SYSTEMSMarch 2021July 2024Allow4010NoNo
17204935SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AI MODEL WATERMARKINGMarch 2021May 2025Allow5011NoNo
17275411DATA ANALYSIS APPARATUS, DATA ANALYSYS METHOD, AND PROGRAMMarch 2021March 2025Abandon4920YesNo
17176206APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ANOMALY DETECTION USING WEIGHTED AUTOENCODERFebruary 2021March 2025Abandon4910NoNo
17261604MONITORING MOVEABLE ENTITIES IN A PREDETERMINED AREAJanuary 2021January 2025Allow4830NoNo
17133168METHODS AND APPARTUS TO CONSTRUCT PROGRAM-DERIVED SEMANTIC GRAPHSDecember 2020March 2025Abandon5020YesNo
17121629Scrolling Techniques for User InterfacesDecember 2020July 2024Allow4330YesYes
17107858EFFICIENT AND SCALABLE COMPUTATION OF GLOBAL FEATURE IMPORTANCE EXPLANATIONSNovember 2020April 2025Allow5230YesNo
17048048METHOD FOR ACCELERATING OPERATIONS AND ACCELERATOR APPARATUSOctober 2020June 2024Allow4410NoNo
17011389Head-Mounted Display With Haptic OutputSeptember 2020January 2025Abandon5280YesYes
16886355ACTIVE ACCESSIBILITY CONTROL BARMay 2020January 2025Allow5640YesYes
16855946CONVERSION OF HANDWRITING TO TEXT IN TEXT FIELDSApril 2020February 2025Allow5840YesYes
16786585HOSPITAL OPERATIONS MEASUREMENT AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FACTORY INSTANCE OF A MEASURE FACTORYFebruary 2020February 2025Abandon60100YesNo
16680195MULTI-TASK SEGMENTED LEARNING MODELSNovember 2019August 2024Allow5760YesNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HO, RUAY L.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
5
Examiner Affirmed
2
(40.0%)
Examiner Reversed
3
(60.0%)
Reversal Percentile
83.2%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 60.0% reversal rate, the PTAB has reversed the examiner's rejections more often than affirming them. This reversal rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals are more successful here than in most other areas.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
8
Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(37.5%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
5
(62.5%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
61.4%
Higher 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, 37.5% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is above the USPTO average, suggesting that filing an appeal can be an effective strategy for prompting reconsideration.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB show good success rates. If you have a strong case on the merits, consider fully prosecuting the appeal to a Board decision.

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner HO, RUAY L - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HO, RUAY L works in Art Unit 2142 and has examined 32 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 68.8%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 46 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HO, RUAY L's allowance rate of 68.8% places them in the 30% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by HO, RUAY L receive 2.72 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 80% 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 HO, RUAY L is 46 months. This places the examiner in the 11% 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 -4.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HO, RUAY L. This interview benefit is in the 5% 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, 18.2% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 17% 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 18.2% 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, 80.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 62% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 58.3% of appeals filed. This is in the 32% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 28.6% 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, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 46% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 10% 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 11% 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:

  • 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.