USPTO Examiner HONG THOMAS J - Art Unit 3729

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19002714APPARATUS, METHOD AND SYSTEMDecember 2024February 2026Abandon1410NoNo
18972582SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PREPARING PRACTICE TESTS USING MACHINE LEARNING MODELSDecember 2024October 2025Allow1011YesNo
18370447LABORATORY ZEBRAFISH AUTISM BEHAVIORAL MODEL APPARATUSSeptember 2023November 2025Allow2600NoNo
18449508INTERACTIVE BEHAVIORAL TREATMENT DELIVERY SYSTEM AND METHOD OF USEAugust 2023January 2026Abandon2910NoNo
18212150ANATOMICAL MODEL AND METHOD FOR SURGICAL TRAININGJune 2023March 2026Allow3320YesNo
18250336TRAINING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SOUND DIRECTIONAL DISCRIMINATION ABILITYApril 2023February 2026Allow3410NoNo
18108466BRAILLE WRITING DEVICEFebruary 2023December 2025Allow3411YesNo
18104179VIRTUAL MEETING COACHING WITH DYNAMICALLY EXTRACTED CONTENTJanuary 2023March 2026Allow3710YesNo
18090263ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED, AND INTERACTIVE EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEM FOR PEOPLE WITH HEARING LOSS AND HEARING HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS AND RELATED METHODSDecember 2022December 2025Abandon3610NoNo
18084899SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING DRIVER SAFETY USING UPLIFT MODELINGDecember 2022November 2025Allow3510YesNo
17895180Game using Latin prefixes and verb stems.August 2022February 2026Abandon4110NoNo
17868861SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DYNAMIC, ACTIVE, G-FORCE AND FLIGHT SIMULATORJuly 2022January 2026Abandon4211NoNo
17792809ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-BASED PLATFORM TO OPTIMIZE SKILL TRAINING AND PERFORMANCEJuly 2022March 2026Allow4420YesNo
17792894CONFIRMATION DEVICE, CONFIRMATION SYSTEM, CONFIRMATION METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUMJuly 2022January 2026Abandon4210NoNo
16558046CHINESE CHARACTER STRUCTURING MEMBER, SYSTEM OF MORTISE AND TENON JOINT STRUCTURES OF CHINESE CHARACTERS FORMED BY CHINESE CHARACTER STRUCTURING MEMBER AND METHOD FOR INPUTTING CHINESE CHARACTERSAugust 2019January 2021Allow1710YesNo
16056649Method and Apparatus for Personal Awareness and GrowthAugust 2018November 2020Allow2710YesNo
16009466Performance-Based Testing System and Method Employing Emulation and VirtualizationJune 2018December 2019Allow1800NoNo
15905355SURGICAL IMPLEMENT TRAINING PROCESSFebruary 2018July 2020Allow2910YesNo
15285930BRAILLE READING USING FINGERPRINT SCANNER AND VARYING VIBRATION FREQUENCIESOctober 2016July 2019Allow3420YesNo
15272903Computer-Implemented Systems and Methods for a Crowd Source-Bootstrapped Spoken Dialog SystemSeptember 2016November 2019Allow3820NoNo
14993492TAEKWONDO POOMSAE TRAINING SYSTEMJanuary 2016April 2017Allow1510YesNo
14980955FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING DICTIONARY SYSTEMDecember 2015January 2021Allow6051YesNo
14976596Interactive Cognitive-Multisensory Interface Apparatus and Methods for Assessing, Profiling, Training, and Improving Performance of Athletes and other PopulationsDecember 2015June 2019Allow4210YesNo
14892186METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ASSISTING PERSONS, PRODUCT PROVIDERS AND/OR SERVICE PROVIDERSNovember 2015June 2019Allow4320NoNo
14943927METHOD, SYSTEM AND RECORDING MEDIUM FOR PROVIDING CONTENT TO BE LEARNEDNovember 2015October 2018Allow3520NoNo
14481631METHOD OF MEASURING ABDOMINAL THRUSTS FOR CLINICAL USE AND TRAININGSeptember 2014June 2015Allow900YesNo
14335845PLATFORM AND KNOWLEDGE-BASED INSTRUCTION ENGINE IMPLEMENTED SKILL-IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM THROUGH CLOUD COMPUTINGJuly 2014March 2019Allow5620NoNo
14122511SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENABLING CROWD-SOURCED EXAMINATION MARKINGNovember 2013July 2017Allow4420YesNo
14083405METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING GAME-RELATED INCENTIVES TO SALES PROFESSIONALS IN A VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTNovember 2013July 2014Allow740YesNo
14082055MONITORING AND MOTIVATING HEALTH HABITSNovember 2013September 2017Allow4630YesNo
13989536DETECTION AND FEEDBACK OF INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONSeptember 2013July 2016Allow3810YesNo
13945681METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR UTILIZING CONTROL POINTS TO MANAGE A USER TO A DESIRED STATEJuly 2013August 2017Allow4940YesNo
13902825SYSTEM FOR PROMOTING TRAVEL EDUCATIONMay 2013May 2018Allow6020YesNo
13780838METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR EEG-BASED TASK MANAGEMENTFebruary 2013June 2016Allow4020YesNo
13548220INTEGRATION METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICEJuly 2012March 2016Allow4450YesNo
13520884PRODUCT SPECIFIC LEARNING INTERFACE PRESENTING INTEGRATED MULTIMEDIA CONTENT ON PRODUCT USAGE AND SERVICEJuly 2012August 2016Allow5030YesNo
13336716METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PLANT MANAGEMENT BY AUGMENTATION REALITYDecember 2011July 2014Allow3140NoNo
11468250Performance-Based Testing System and Method Employing Emulation and VirtualizationAugust 2006March 2018Allow60100YesYes

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HONG, THOMAS J.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
83.4%
Higher 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, 50.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner HONG, THOMAS J - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HONG, THOMAS J works in Art Unit 3729 and has examined 24 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 40 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HONG, THOMAS J's allowance rate of 100.0% places them in the 100% 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 HONG, THOMAS J receive 2.50 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 73% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by HONG, THOMAS J is 40 months. This places the examiner in the 25% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +0.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HONG, THOMAS J. This interview benefit is in the 16% 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.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 33.3% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 73% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 33.3% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 50% 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.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 99% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 50.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 49% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 42% 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 46% 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:

  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

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.