USPTO Examiner KOENIG VY N - Art Unit 2938

Examiner Information

Name: KOENIG, VY N
Art Unit: 2938
Total Cases: 23
Last Active: January 2025

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
29985989HAIR DRYERJanuary 2025April 2025Allow300NoNo
29986100CombJanuary 2025March 2025Allow200NoNo
29982721HEART SHAPED HAIR CLIPJanuary 2025March 2025Allow200NoNo
29982195HairdryerJanuary 2025March 2025Allow200NoNo
29981516Hair Washing Neck SupportDecember 2024February 2025Allow200NoNo
29980691Hair DryerDecember 2024February 2025Allow200NoNo
35522002Accessory for fire helmetJune 2024April 2025Allow800NoNo
29919980HAIR EXTENSION HOLDERDecember 2023April 2025Allow1600NoNo
29906726CombNovember 2023April 2025Allow1700NoNo
29906728CombNovember 2023April 2025Allow1700NoNo
29906733CombNovember 2023April 2025Allow1700NoNo
29916061HAIR DRYERNovember 2023April 2025Allow1700NoNo
29914973SAFETY VESTOctober 2023January 2025Allow1400NoNo
29905534Welding maskOctober 2023May 2025Allow1800NoNo
29903485Fire ExtinguisherSeptember 2023January 2025Allow1600NoNo
29901943Welding maskSeptember 2023December 2024Allow1500NoNo
29901815Welding maskSeptember 2023December 2024Allow1500NoNo
29911057FIRE EXTINGUISHERAugust 2023March 2025Allow1900NoNo
29910920COMBAugust 2023April 2025Allow1900NoNo
29900358Hair DryerAugust 2023December 2024Allow1500NoNo
35521996Hair dryerAugust 2023June 2025Allow2200NoNo
35522006Stand for hair drierAugust 2023May 2025Allow2100NoNo
29880343SMART PROTECTIVE MASKJuly 2023January 2025Allow1800NoNo
29893764HAIR STRAIGHTENER ATTACHMENT COMBJune 2023April 2025Allow2200NoNo
35520952Air nozzle for hair drierMay 2023January 2025Allow2000NoNo
35520859Hair drierMay 2023June 2025Abandon2510NoNo
35520848Air nozzle for hair drierMay 2023January 2025Allow2000NoNo
35520821Hair drierMay 2023June 2025Abandon2610NoNo
35520133Hair drierFebruary 2023March 2025Allow2410NoNo
29556916BIOLOGICAL SAMPLE COLLECTION CARDMarch 2016October 2018Allow3100NoNo

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 KOENIG, VY N - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner KOENIG, VY N works in Art Unit 2938 and has examined 23 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 91.3%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 18 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner KOENIG, VY N's allowance rate of 91.3% places them in the 75% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by KOENIG, VY N receive 0.13 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 KOENIG, VY N is 18 months. This places the examiner in the 95% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

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 4% 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 30% 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 28.6% of allowed cases (in the 95% 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:

    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.