USPTO Examiner LEUNG KA CHUN - Art Unit 3642

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
17119593PASSENGER SEATING ARRANGEMENTDecember 2020January 2023Allow2620YesNo
17109355VEHICLE WITH AT LEAST ONE EMERGENCY EXIT SYSTEMDecember 2020November 2022Allow2310YesNo
17059971FLOOR STRUCTURE FOR AIRCRAFT LAVATORY UNITNovember 2020January 2024Abandon3801NoNo
17058778AIRCRAFT SEAT UNITNovember 2020February 2023Allow2720YesNo
17095634SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AERIAL AIRCRAFT RESUPPLYNovember 2020February 2023Allow2731NoNo
17094180ENERGY ATTENUATING POD CARRIER SYSTEM FOR VERTICAL LIFT AIRCRAFTNovember 2020January 2024Allow3831NoNo
17077518Aircraft door mechanism, and associated aircraft and moving methodOctober 2020January 2023Allow2720NoNo
17008138UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE PORTAugust 2020August 2023Abandon3611NoNo
16997702INTEGRATED AIRCRAFT SEAT CONTROL PANELAugust 2020January 2023Allow2910NoNo
16896377PASSIVE-RELEASE, SNAP-FIT COUPLING DEVICES FOR SUSPENDED PAYLOAD CONTAINERS OF AIRCRAFTSJune 2020October 2022Allow2810YesNo
16849593UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE PORTApril 2020March 2023Abandon3510NoNo
16842735Double Translating Plug-Type Passenger Entry DoorApril 2020February 2023Allow3420NoNo
16805962LATTICE STRUCTURE CUSHIONS FOR AIRCRAFT FUEL SYSTEMSMarch 2020February 2023Allow3540YesNo
16786301SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND APPARATUS TO CONTROL AIRCRAFT ROLL OPERATIONS USING WING ACTUATORSFebruary 2020January 2023Allow3611YesNo
16784748ASSEMBLY COMPRISING AN AIRCRAFT DOOR AND AN AUXILIARY EQUIPMENTFebruary 2020December 2022Allow3411NoNo
16743572Removable Air Filter Assemblies for AircraftJanuary 2020April 2022Allow2711YesNo
16709588FLYING TAXI FOR FACILITATING THE TRANSPORTATION OF PAYLOADSDecember 2019April 2023Abandon4020NoNo
16705438SYSTEM FOR OPERATING AN AIRCRAFT DOORDecember 2019September 2022Allow3310YesNo
16613767AIRCRAFT CABIN COMPRISING A CARGO AREA INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE PASSENGERSNovember 2019October 2022Allow3520YesNo
16679018BONDED SKINS FOR DUCTED-ROTOR AIRCRAFTNovember 2019September 2022Allow3411YesNo
16595752ENHANCED DESIGN FOR STRINGER RUNOUT TERMINATIONS ON COMPOSITE PANELSOctober 2019March 2023Allow4140YesNo
16565175AIRCRAFT PARTITIONS HAVING AN ELECTROCHROMIC DISPLAY, AND RELATED METHODSSeptember 2019July 2022Abandon3510NoNo
16377669DOOR LATCH ARRANGEMENTApril 2019March 2023Abandon4720NoNo

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 LEUNG, KA CHUN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner LEUNG, KA CHUN works in Art Unit 3642 and has examined 23 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 73.9%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 34 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner LEUNG, KA CHUN's allowance rate of 73.9% places them in the 40% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by LEUNG, KA CHUN receive 1.70 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 32% 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 LEUNG, KA CHUN is 34 months. This places the examiner in the 44% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +50.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by LEUNG, KA CHUN. This interview benefit is in the 92% 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, 37.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 86% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 22.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 30% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows below-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. You may need to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 34% 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 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 39% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions less often than average. Allowances may 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:

  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.

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.