USPTO Examiner HWANG CHARLES TAE - Art Unit 2934

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
29996047Battery CaseMarch 2025April 2025Allow100NoNo
29996046Battery CaseMarch 2025May 2025Allow200NoNo
29986660Wireless ChargerJanuary 2025April 2025Allow300NoNo
29983069USB ChargerJanuary 2025April 2025Allow310NoNo
29982524Wireless ChargerJanuary 2025April 2025Allow300NoNo
29981477POWER BANKDecember 2024March 2025Allow200NoNo
29980519Headphone Charging CaseDecember 2024April 2025Allow300NoNo
29980303WIRELESS CHARGERDecember 2024March 2025Allow300NoNo
29980249Mobile ChargerDecember 2024May 2025Allow510NoNo
29977955MOBILE POWER BANKDecember 2024March 2025Allow300NoNo
29962149POWER BANKSeptember 2024November 2024Allow200NoNo
29962058BATTERYSeptember 2024October 2024Allow200NoNo
29956668SMART BATTERYAugust 2024December 2024Allow420NoNo
29942227MOBILE POWER DEVICEMay 2024November 2024Allow610NoNo
29913052POWER BANKSeptember 2023February 2025Allow1700NoNo
29909005MOBILE POWER BANKJuly 2023November 2024Allow1600YesNo
29909004MOBILE POWER BANKJuly 2023December 2024Allow1600YesNo
29880926BatteryJuly 2023January 2025Allow1800NoNo
29880639BATTERYJuly 2023December 2024Allow1600YesNo
29879905POWER BANKJuly 2023March 2025Allow2000NoNo
29879903Game controller charger baseJuly 2023January 2025Allow1800NoNo
29879500BATTERY FOR HAIR CLIPPER OR TRIMMERJuly 2023February 2025Allow1910NoNo
29878967Power AdapterJune 2023December 2024Allow1800NoNo
29878941MOBILE BATTERYJune 2023March 2025Allow2000NoNo
29896066VAPORIZER BATTERYJune 2023February 2025Allow1910NoNo
29893783BatteryJune 2023May 2025Allow2320NoNo
29878127Battery ChargerJune 2023January 2025Allow1900NoNo
29877950Charging Case for Wireless EarphonesJune 2023December 2024Allow1800NoNo
29877711Charging Station for Electric VehiclesJune 2023January 2025Allow1900NoNo
29877823MAGNETIC BATTERY STORAGE DEVICEJune 2023November 2024Allow1700YesNo
29877714Charging Station for Electric VehiclesJune 2023January 2025Allow1900NoNo
29894245Portable Power StationJune 2023February 2025Allow2000NoNo
29894125MOBILE POWER BANKJune 2023November 2024Allow1700YesNo
29894124MOBILE POWER BANKJune 2023February 2025Allow2010NoNo
29877359VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONJune 2023February 2025Allow2110NoNo
29877435Electrical ChargerJune 2023December 2024Allow1800NoNo
29893945COMBINED RECHARGEABLE PORTABLE POWER SUPPLY AND AIR COMPRESSORJune 2023November 2024Allow1700YesNo
29877288Power SourceJune 2023January 2025Allow1910NoNo
29877130POWER ADAPTERJune 2023December 2024Allow1900NoNo
29877108Wireless ChargerJune 2023February 2025Allow2010NoNo
29877028Rechargeable BatteryMay 2023October 2024Allow1700NoNo
29876904CAR JUMP STARTERMay 2023December 2024Allow1900NoNo
29876795PORTABLE POWER STATIONMay 2023November 2024Allow1700NoNo
29876701Wireless ChargerMay 2023December 2024Allow1900NoNo
29876647BATTERY CHARGERMay 2023January 2025Allow2010NoNo
29876661BATTERY CHARGERMay 2023January 2025Allow2010NoNo
29876641BATTERY CHARGERMay 2023October 2024Allow1700YesNo
29850524Wireless ChargerAugust 2022April 2025Allow3200NoNo
29825919DUAL WIRELESS CHARGER CASEFebruary 2022April 2025Allow3800NoNo
29825917WIRELESS CHARGER CASEFebruary 2022April 2025Allow3800NoNo

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 HWANG, CHARLES TAE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HWANG, CHARLES TAE works in Art Unit 2934 and has examined 36 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 19 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HWANG, CHARLES TAE's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 99% 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 HWANG, CHARLES TAE receive 0.28 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 1% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by HWANG, CHARLES TAE is 19 months. This places the examiner in the 93% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HWANG, CHARLES TAE. This interview benefit is in the 11% 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.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 100.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 99% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 29% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments less often than average. You may need to make most claim amendments yourself.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 11.1% of allowed cases (in the 89% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Consider after-final amendments: This examiner frequently enters after-final amendments. If you can clearly overcome rejections with claim amendments, file an after-final amendment before resorting to an RCE.

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.