USPTO Examiner HUYNH KIM NGOC - Art Unit 2175

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18988689DATA SENDING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DATA RECEIVING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUMDecember 2024June 2025Allow610NoNo
18612953POLICER SYNCHRONIZATION ACROSS MULTIPLE PIPELINES IN A DPUMarch 2024July 2025Allow1600NoNo
18444346METHOD OF AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING POWER CONSUMPTION OF A DEVICEFebruary 2024June 2025Allow1600YesNo
18489266COMMUNICATION SYSTEMOctober 2023July 2025Allow2110NoNo
18356055POWER-ON-RESET REQUEST FUNCTIONALITY IN SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES AND POWER MANAGEMENT ICSJuly 2023August 2025Allow2510NoNo
18342775OUT-OF-BAND NETWORKING FOR HETEROGENEOUS COMPUTING PLATFORMS IN LOW-POWER STATESJune 2023July 2025Allow2510NoNo
18204772Synchronizing Client Device with Independent SensorJune 2023May 2025Allow2310YesNo
18320701CLOCK DISTRIBUTION NETWORK, AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND SEMICONDUCTOR SYSTEM INCLUDING THE CLOCK DISTRIBUTION NETWORKMay 2023June 2025Allow2510NoNo
18307010Silicon-Agnostic Sensor Hub AbstractionApril 2023July 2025Allow2610YesNo
17273328SENSING AUDIO INFORMATION AND FOOTSTEPS TO CONTROL POWERMarch 2021March 2025Abandon4930YesNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner HUYNH, KIM NGOC - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HUYNH, KIM NGOC works in Art Unit 2175 and has examined 1 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 0.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 49 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HUYNH, KIM NGOC's allowance rate of 0.0% places them in the 0% 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 HUYNH, KIM NGOC receive 3.00 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 HUYNH, KIM NGOC is 49 months. This places the examiner in the 6% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 0.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 0% 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 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 1% 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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 12% 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.

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.