USPTO Examiner ZHANG DUAN - Art Unit 3699

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18420617METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PAYMENT FOR CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCYJanuary 2024April 2025Allow1410NoNo
18525985DECENTRALIZED COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EFFICIENT TRANSACTION DISPUTE MANAGEMENT USING BLOCKCHAINDecember 2023March 2025Allow1510YesNo
18499429GEOGRAPHICALLY LOCAL LICENSE SHARINGNovember 2023May 2025Allow1810YesNo
18238924INTELLIGENT CREDIT CARD PAYMENT SYSTEM AND PAYMENT PROCESSING METHODAugust 2023November 2024Allow1510NoNo
18230261Cryptocurrency Storage DistributionAugust 2023October 2024Allow1500NoNo
18364165Method and System for Transferring a Digital Asset and for Managing a Digital Wallet ApplicationAugust 2023April 2025Abandon2010NoNo
18220246SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISTRIBUTING DATAJuly 2023June 2025Allow2330YesNo
18130818NFT Based Secure Authentication and Notification Apparatuses, Processes and SystemsApril 2023January 2025Allow2100NoNo
18128700WALLET SYSTEM AND TRANSACTION METHODMarch 2023December 2024Allow2100NoNo
18182325Interactive Artificial Intelligence System For Blockchain TransactionsMarch 2023June 2025Abandon2701NoNo
18082630SYSTEMS, METHODS AND SCHEMA FOR CRYPTOGRAPHIC PROMISSORY FILESDecember 2022March 2025Allow2711NoNo
18060991SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR STORING MUTABLE USER DATA IN AN NON-FUNGIBLE TOKEN (NFT)December 2022July 2024Allow1900NoNo
18052710SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ONE-CLICK PAYMENTSNovember 2022October 2024Allow3310NoNo
17965655BLOCKCHAIN APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MOBILE EDGE COMPUTINGOctober 2022March 2025Allow2921NoNo
17956143DECENTRALIZED COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EFFICIENT TRANSACTION DISPUTE MANAGEMENT USING BLOCKCHAINSeptember 2022August 2024Allow2310NoNo
17936441SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR HYPERLEDGER-BASED PAYMENT TRANSACTIONS, ALERTS, AND DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, USING SMART CONTRACTSSeptember 2022December 2024Allow2630YesNo
17955993INTERACTIVE USER INTERFACE SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ANALYZING TRANSACTION ATTRIBUTES AND DISPUTE INFORMATION USING BLOCKCHAINSeptember 2022May 2025Allow3130YesNo
17839740SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING ONLINE AND HYBRIDCARD INTERACTIONSJune 2022March 2025Allow3321YesNo
17838561BINDING CRYPTOGRAM WITH PROTOCOL CHARACTERISTICSJune 2022September 2024Allow2712NoNo
17662893NOVEL MEANS AND METHODS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SECURE TRANSACTIONSMay 2022November 2024Abandon3010NoNo
17741319ACCESS CONTROL USING STAND-ALONE PARAMETERS FOR WIRELESS DEVICESMay 2022April 2025Abandon3520NoNo
17741266SMART CONTRACT-BASED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT USING MILESTONE BASED DISTRIBUTIONMay 2022October 2024Abandon2910NoNo
17771494PAYMENT PROCESSING SYSTEM AND METHODApril 2022October 2024Allow3020NoNo
17700797SYSTEM AND METHOD TO MANAGEMENT A CRYPTOGRAPHIC BANKING NETWORKMarch 2022October 2024Allow3111NoNo
17760728MULTI-CRITERIA BLOCKCHAIN PROTOCOLMarch 2022December 2024Allow3320YesNo
17585539Compliance Commerce Transaction Management Apparatuses, Processes and SystemsJanuary 2022May 2024Allow2810NoNo
17530410SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPLEMENTING AUTOMATIC PAYER AUTHENTICATIONNovember 2021April 2025Allow4131YesNo
17521591SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IDENTITY VERIFICATION OF MATH-BASED CURRENCY ACCOUNT HOLDERSNovember 2021August 2024Allow3320YesNo
17451733CARD-NOT-PRESENT TRANSACTIONS WITH CARDHOLDER-CHOSEN CVVOctober 2021March 2025Allow4150YesNo
17474601METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CONSENT TO TIME-BOUND QUERIES IN A BLOCKCHAINSeptember 2021September 2024Allow3630YesNo
17475048SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ANONYMOUSLY TRACKING AND COMPARING PORTFOLIOS ACROSS THE SIMILAR INVESTMENT PROFILESSeptember 2021April 2025Abandon4340YesNo
17460281COMPUTING SYSTEM FOR DISTRIBUTING CRYPTOCURRENCY TO NEW USERSAugust 2021July 2024Allow3520NoNo
17306640SHARED PURCHASESMay 2021October 2024Abandon4130NoNo
17106534SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS SERVICE ENROLLMENT AND EXECUTING TOKENIZED TRANSACTIONSNovember 2020May 2024Abandon4120YesNo
17016436VALUE TRANSFER CARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSeptember 2020October 2024Allow5060YesYes
17011023INSTANT ISSUANCE OF PAYMENT DEVICESSeptember 2020June 2025Abandon5840YesYes
16861839TEMPLATE BASED MULTI-PARTY PROCESS MANAGEMENTApril 2020June 2025Abandon6040YesYes
16821713Linked User AccountsMarch 2020November 2024Abandon5640YesNo
15687105TRADESMAN BUSINESS PURCHASE SYSTEMAugust 2017June 2023Abandon60160NoNo

Appeals Overview

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

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions

Total PTAB Decisions
2
Examiner Affirmed
2
(100.0%)
Examiner Reversed
0
(0.0%)
Reversal Percentile
17.5%
Lower than average

What This Means

With a 0.0% reversal rate, the PTAB affirms the examiner's rejections in the vast majority of cases. This reversal rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that appeals face significant challenges here.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
3
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
3
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
8.3%
Lower 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, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.

Strategic Recommendations

Appeals to PTAB face challenges. Ensure your case has strong merit before committing to full Board review.

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner ZHANG, DUAN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner ZHANG, DUAN works in Art Unit 3699 and has examined 38 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 68.4%, 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 ZHANG, DUAN's allowance rate of 68.4% places them in the 22% 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 ZHANG, DUAN receive 2.34 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 80% 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 ZHANG, DUAN is 31 months. This places the examiner in the 38% percentile for prosecution speed. Prosecution timelines are slightly slower than average with this examiner.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +3.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by ZHANG, DUAN. This interview benefit is in the 26% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide a below-average benefit with this examiner.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 28.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 42% 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 4.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 2% 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, 66.7% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 54% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. If you have strong arguments, a PAC request may result in favorable reconsideration.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 33.3% of appeals filed. This is in the 3% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner rarely withdraws rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. If you file an appeal, be prepared to fully prosecute it to a PTAB decision. Per MPEP § 1207, the examiner will prepare an Examiner's Answer maintaining the rejections.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 160.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 99% 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 37% 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 38% 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:

  • 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.
  • 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.