USPTO Examiner HUYNH KIM NGOC - Art Unit 2176

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19130316SYSTEM, METHOD, APPARATUS AND DEVICE FOR MEASURING POWER CONSUMPTION OF SERVER, AND STORAGE MEDIUMMay 2025March 2026Allow1000YesNo
18853966Reset Using a Shared Reset Signal and a Retention MechanismOctober 2024February 2026Allow1600YesNo
18845240A NOVEL CONTROL METHOD FOR SWITCHED-MODE POWER SUPPLIESSeptember 2024March 2026Allow1800YesNo
18810237MULTI-NODE SERVER WITH POWER SCALINGAugust 2024January 2026Allow1600YesNo
18633841SOC FAULT INDICATION STRATEGY TO THE MCU FOR THE ADAPTIVE PARTITIONS DURING BOOTUP STAGEApril 2024March 2026Abandon2310NoNo
18628354DUAL PATH CLOCK FORWARDINGApril 2024February 2026Allow2220NoNo
18606632CONTROL METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICEMarch 2024February 2026Allow2320NoNo
18590635SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR UTILIZING EMBEDDED THERMAL SENSORS OF INFORMATION HANDLING RESOURCE TO MONITOR THERMAL CHANGE ON CIRCUIT BOARDFebruary 2024March 2026Allow2420YesNo
18683957METHOD, ASSEMBLY-SUPPORT-UNIT AND ASSEMBLY ARRANGEMENT FOR AUTOMATION MACHINE-BASED EQUIPPING A SWITCHING CABINET OR SERVER RACK WITH PLACEMENT MODULES OR MAINTAINING PLACEMENT MODULES OF A SWITCHING CABINET OR SERVER RACKFebruary 2024January 2026Abandon2310NoNo
18525695ESTABLISHING AN INTERNAL CLOCK VALUE OF AN INTERNET-OF-THINGS DEVICE BASED ON A TIMESTAMP RECEIVED FROM A SECURITY SERVICE VIA A SECURE CONNECTIONNovember 2023January 2026Allow2510YesNo
18289460USER PRESENCE DETECTION KEYBOARD WITH CONFIGURABLE SLEEP MODE CONTROLNovember 2023December 2025Allow2510YesNo
18469807SECURE BOOT METHOD AND APPARATUSSeptember 2023November 2025Allow2620YesNo
18271137METHOD FOR ASSIGNING ELECTRICAL SIGNALS IN A NETWORKJuly 2023October 2025Allow2710YesNo
18142728SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DYNAMICALLY FREEZING INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM PORTS TO MINIMIZE POWER CONSUMED BY IDLE PLUG AND PLAY DEVICESMay 2023December 2025Allow3120NoNo
18137665POWER MANAGEMENT INTEGRATED CIRCUIT, ELECTRONIC DEVICE HAVING THE SAME, AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOFApril 2023November 2025Allow3010YesNo
18303403POWER CONSUMPTION MANAGEMENT THROUGH APPLYING OF A SYSTEM POWER CAP ON HETEROGENOUS SYSTEMSApril 2023October 2025Allow3030YesNo
18157967KERNEL REBOOT METHODJanuary 2023November 2025Allow3320YesNo
17813127MANAGING A THERMAL POLICY OF AN INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEMJuly 2022December 2025Allow4120YesNo
17510545LOW POWER STANDBY MODE FOR MEMORY DEVICESOctober 2021September 2025Allow4750YesNo
17482327SOFTWARE ENTITY POWER CONSUMPTION ESTIMATION AND MONITORINGSeptember 2021February 2026Allow5320NoNo

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 2176 and has examined 2 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 100.0%, this examiner allows applications at a higher rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 53 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HUYNH, KIM NGOC's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 95% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is more likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by HUYNH, KIM NGOC receive 3.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 94% 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 53 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 +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HUYNH, KIM NGOC. This interview benefit is in the 13% 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, 25.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 38% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show below-average effectiveness with this examiner. Carefully evaluate whether an RCE or continuation is the better strategy.

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.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 0.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 2% 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 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.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 14% 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.