USPTO Examiner NGUYEN ROBERT T - Art Unit 3619

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18916350SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MONITORING HEALTH OF A ROBOTIC FINISHING CELLOctober 2024May 2025Allow710NoNo
18916376SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR HEALTH MONITORING OF A SANDING PAD DURING AN AUTONOMOUS FINISHING PROCESSOctober 2024May 2025Allow710NoNo
18659595METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ROBOT CONTROL, DEVICE, ROBOT, AND MEDIUMMay 2024May 2025Allow1220NoNo
18410557SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUS APPLICATION OF A COATING TO A WORKPIECEJanuary 2024May 2024Allow410NoNo
18523712METHOD FOR SELECTIVE, AUTONOMOUS PROCESSING OF REGIONS OF A WORKPIECE VIA THREE-DIMENSIONAL SANDINGNovember 2023February 2024Allow200YesNo
18389166METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUSLY SCANNING A WORKPIECENovember 2023August 2024Allow910YesNo
18379126SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ACCOUNTING FOR COMPLIANCE IN A WORKPIECE DURING AUTONOMOUS PROCESSINGOctober 2023January 2025Allow1510NoNo
18485212AUTONOMOUS UNKNOWN OBJECT PICK AND PLACEOctober 2023January 2025Allow1510NoNo
18379121METHODS FOR GENERATING A DIGITAL TWIN OF A WORKPIECE IN FINISHING PROCESSESOctober 2023January 2025Allow1510NoNo
18379130METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUSLY REPAIRING SURFACE DEFECTS IN A WORKPIECE THROUGH SURFACE MODIFICATIONSOctober 2023January 2025Allow1510NoNo
18379114METHODS FOR TRACKING ABRASIVENESS OF A SANDING PADOctober 2023January 2025Allow1510NoNo
18326770ESTIMATING JOINT FRICTION AND TRACKING ERROR OF A ROBOTICS END EFFECTORMay 2023January 2025Allow2010NoNo
18316485ROBOT LOCALIZATION USING VARIANCE SAMPLINGMay 2023August 2024Allow1500YesNo
18305614DIGITAL CONTEXT-AWARE DATA COLLECTIONApril 2023July 2024Allow1500NoNo
18131636AUTONOMOUS MOWERApril 2023November 2024Abandon2010NoNo
18111470SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUSLY SCANNING AND PROCESSING A PARTFebruary 2023June 2024Allow1620YesNo
18049081VENUE DETECTIONOctober 2022January 2024Allow1410NoNo
17697173ROBOTIC CONTROL FOR TOOL SHARPENINGMarch 2022October 2024Allow3130YesNo
17515401VISION AND CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR ROBOTIC PACK STATIONSOctober 2021May 2025Allow4300YesNo
17505094ROBOT SYSTEM, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING ROBOT SYSTEM, AND PROGRAMOctober 2021May 2025Allow4310YesNo
17465883METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING INDOOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL SEMANTIC MAP WITH WALL CORNER AS CRITICAL FEATURE BASED ON ROBOT PLATFORMSeptember 2021February 2024Allow2910NoNo
17434760ROBOT AND CONTROL SYSTEMAugust 2021January 2024Allow2910NoNo
17405997CLEANER SYSTEM, CLEANER, AND DIRT DETERMINATION PROGRAMAugust 2021October 2024Abandon3810NoNo
17375644MULTIPLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM FORCE SENSORJuly 2021June 2025Allow4720YesNo
17414698AUTOMATED MOBILE VEHICLE LIFT COLUMNJune 2021March 2024Allow3301YesNo
17281506CONTROL DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUMMarch 2021February 2024Allow3520NoNo
17262966Method for Guiding a Motor Vehicle in an at Least Partly Automated MannerJanuary 2021February 2024Allow3710NoNo
17250316INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, PROGRAM, AND STORAGE APPARATUSJanuary 2021April 2024Abandon3910NoNo
17051167Fire Protection Robot, System Comprising the Fire Protection Robot, and Method for Using the SameOctober 2020February 2024Abandon4010NoNo
17014545SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ROBOTIC PICKINGSeptember 2020November 2024Allow5030YesNo
16889954IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM AND INDUSTRIAL MACHINEJune 2020November 2024Abandon5350YesNo
16155272Dynamic flying lane management systems and methods for drone air traffic controlOctober 2018March 2024Allow6090YesNo

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 NGUYEN, ROBERT T - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner NGUYEN, ROBERT T works in Art Unit 3619 and has examined 28 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 82.1%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 29 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner NGUYEN, ROBERT T's allowance rate of 82.1% places them in the 48% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by NGUYEN, ROBERT T receive 1.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 36% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by NGUYEN, ROBERT T is 29 months. This places the examiner in the 48% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +16.7% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by NGUYEN, ROBERT T. This interview benefit is in the 62% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 27.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 37% 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 12.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 7% 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 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 31% 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 17.4% of allowed cases (in the 92% 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:

  • 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.