USPTO Examiner NGUYEN VINH - Art Unit 2453

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18417300ENHANCED CHATBOT RESPONSES THROUGH MACHINE LEARNINGJanuary 2024November 2025Allow2220YesNo
18525509FABRIC AVAILABILITY AND SYNCHRONIZATIONNovember 2023November 2024Allow1210YesNo
18525517FABRIC AVAILABILITY AND SYNCHRONIZATIONNovember 2023October 2025Allow2220YesNo
18378347METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DHCP POLICY MANAGEMENTOctober 2023March 2026Abandon2911NoNo
18273242TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEVICE, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING METHOD, AND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROGRAMJuly 2023December 2025Abandon2910NoNo
18184906METHOD, COMPUTER DEVICE, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM TO DISPLAY MESSAGE INFORMATION ON MAPMarch 2023March 2025Allow2430YesNo
17942033ENHANCED CHATBOT RESPONSES THROUGH MACHINE LEARNINGSeptember 2022September 2023Allow1210YesNo
17714766Modular Technologies for Servicing Telephony SystemsApril 2022February 2026Allow4640YesNo
17657774VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE, VEHICLE, VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUMApril 2022March 2025Abandon3520NoNo
17694609METHODS AND APPARATUS TO MONITOR STREAMING MEDIAMarch 2022March 2024Allow2420YesNo
17585198ESTABLISHING PKI CHAIN OF TRUST IN AIR GAPPED CLOUDJanuary 2022July 2024Allow2910YesNo
17578088ELECTRONIC APPARATUS FOR RESPONDING TO QUESTION USING MULTI CHAT-BOT AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFJanuary 2022February 2024Allow2510YesNo
17606857PROVIDING RESPONSES IN AN EVENT-RELATED SESSIONOctober 2021May 2024Allow3120YesNo
17433425ANOMALY DETECTION DEVICE, ANOMALY DETECTION METHOD, AND ANOMALY DETECTION PROGRAMAugust 2021April 2023Allow2020YesNo
17333349Network Data Processing Method, Apparatus, Electronic Device, and Storage MediumMay 2021December 2023Abandon3110NoNo
17244846ALTERING AUTOMATED CONVERSATION SYSTEMSApril 2021February 2025Allow4640YesNo
17226336DEVICE MANAGEMENT APPARATUS, DEVICE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AND DEVICE MANAGEMENT METHODApril 2021December 2022Abandon2140YesNo
17225007VOLUMETRIC CONVERSATIONAL SERVICES USING NETWORK EDGEApril 2021June 2023Abandon2710NoNo
17282911SHORT-TERM LEASE ALLOCATION FOR NETWORK ADDRESS CONFLICT REDUCTION IN DHCP FAILOVER DEPLOYMENTSApril 2021November 2023Allow3140YesNo
17209669MEASURING INCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROCESS EFFICIENCY METRICS UTILIZING REAL-TIME CONVERSATION ANALYSISMarch 2021June 2023Allow2740YesNo
17192780CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT AND ANALYTICS IN CELLULAR NETWORKSMarch 2021June 2023Allow2720YesNo
17177261APPARATUSES AND METHODS FOR FACILITATING AUTOMATED INTERDOMAIN COMMUNICATIONS ANALYTICS AUTOMATION FUNCTIONALITY AND PROFILINGFebruary 2021December 2025Allow5831YesNo
17268132Management Model for Network Equipment Performance MeasurementsFebruary 2021June 2024Allow4040NoYes
17172820IDENTIFYING DEVICES AND DEVICE INTENTS IN AN IOT NETWORKFebruary 2021December 2023Allow3450YesNo
17164146SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO DETERMINE ROOT CAUSE OF CONNECTION FAILURESFebruary 2021July 2024Abandon4160YesNo
17147327FABRIC AVAILABILITY AND SYNCHRONIZATIONJanuary 2021August 2023Allow3140YesNo
17134049METHODS AND SYSTEMS OF AUTOMATIC NETWORK SERVICE INITIATIONDecember 2020March 2023Allow2630YesNo
17134054METHODS AND SYSTEMS OF AUTOMATIC NETWORK SERVICE INITIATION USING A NETWORK SERVICE SERVERDecember 2020March 2022Allow1430YesNo
17255956COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL DISCOVER METHOD IN CONSTRAINED APPLICATION PROTOCOL (COAP)December 2020June 2024Allow4160YesNo
17126325AUTOMATED NETWORKING DEVICE REPLACEMENT SYSTEMDecember 2020October 2023Allow3440YesNo
17125429SYSTEM FOR NETWORKING DEVICE WITH DATA MODEL ENGINES FOR CONFIGURING NETWORK PARAMETERSDecember 2020November 2022Abandon2330NoNo
17032799HYPOTHESIS DRIVEN DIAGNOSIS OF NETWORK SYSTEMSSeptember 2020August 2023Allow3540YesNo
17030839LINK CONFIGURATION METHOD AND CONTROLLERSeptember 2020October 2023Allow3740YesNo
17023700NVME-OVER-FABRICS GATEWAY SYSTEMSeptember 2020April 2023Allow3120YesNo
16944942Address Management Method and System, and DeviceJuly 2020September 2022Allow2630YesNo
16958291VIRTUALISATION OF A CONNECTED OBJECTJune 2020January 2022Abandon1920NoNo
16850954COMMUNICATIONS METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MIGRATING A NETWORK INTERFACE AND/OR IP ADDRESS FROM ONE POD TO ANOTHER POD IN A KUBERNETES SYSTEMApril 2020May 2023Allow3730YesNo
16848135UPDATING STATEFUL SYSTEM IN SERVER CLUSTERApril 2020April 2022Allow2420YesNo
16621582METHOD FOR CONFIGURING A CENTRAL CONTROL UNIT BELONGING TO A HOME AUTOMATION SYSTEMApril 2020November 2023Abandon4760YesNo
16832962METHODS AND APPARATUS TO FACILITATE DEVICE IDENTIFICATIONMarch 2020July 2023Allow4060YesNo
16801268ON-PREMISE AND OFF-PREMISE DEBUGGINGFebruary 2020December 2025Abandon6070YesNo
16633968METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ESTABLISHING FAULT TOLERANT COMMUNICATION CHANNEL BETWEEN TERMINAL DEVICE AND TARGET SYSTEMJanuary 2020November 2021Abandon2210NoNo
16721769METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR GENERATING INFORMATIONDecember 2019September 2022Abandon3340YesNo
16719944METHODS AND APPARATUS TO MONITOR STREAMING MEDIADecember 2019October 2021Allow2220YesNo
16716933ONLINE SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RECEIVING FEEDBACK REGARDING APPAREL OPTIONS VIA AN ONLINE COMMUNITYDecember 2019December 2021Abandon2420NoNo
16714090INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODDecember 2019September 2021Abandon2120NoNo
16714559ENHANCED CHATBOT RESPONSES DURING CONVERSATIONS WITH UNKNOWN USERS BASED ON MATURITY METRICS DETERMINED FROM HISTORY OF CHATBOT INTERACTIONSDecember 2019May 2022Allow2950YesNo
16468424FAILURE DETECTION BY TEST DATA PACKETS OF REDUNDANCY PROTOCOLSJune 2019December 2023Abandon5450NoNo
16392825ADAPTIVE THRESHOLD SELECTION FOR SD-WAN TUNNEL FAILURE PREDICTIONApril 2019September 2022Allow4120YesNo
16328450METHOD FOR ASSIGNING A MAC ADDRESS, AND DATABASE WITH MAC ADDRESSESFebruary 2019March 2023Allow4920NoYes
16281478METHOD OF PERFORMING FAULT MANAGEMENT IN AN ELECTRONIC APPARATUSFebruary 2019October 2023Abandon5640YesNo
16219434METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING VIDEO QUALITY, AND METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR LOCATING NETWORK FAULTDecember 2018September 2022Abandon4540NoNo
15833523TECHNOLOGIES FOR MANAGING A FLEXIBLE HOST INTERFACE OF A NETWORK INTERFACE CONTROLLERDecember 2017January 2022Abandon5020NoNo

Appeals Overview

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
1
Examiner Affirmed
0
(0.0%)
Examiner Reversed
1
(100.0%)
Reversal Percentile
93.2%
Higher than average

What This Means

With a 100.0% 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
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
2
(100.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
96.6%
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, 100.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

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 NGUYEN, VINH - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner NGUYEN, VINH works in Art Unit 2453 and has examined 41 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 61.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 31 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner NGUYEN, VINH's allowance rate of 61.0% places them in the 21% 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 NGUYEN, VINH receive 3.39 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 93% 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 NGUYEN, VINH is 31 months. This places the examiner in the 55% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly faster than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +62.6% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by NGUYEN, VINH. 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, 24.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 36% 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 6.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 6% 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 8% 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 66.7% of appeals filed. This is in the 49% percentile among all examiners. 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, 100.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 91% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 15% 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 19% 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.
  • 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 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.

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.