USPTO Examiner HO ANNA THI - Art Unit 3752

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19035920CIRCULAR SPRINKLER IRRIGATION ALL-IN-ONE MACHINE CAPABLE OF SPRAYING WATER, FERTILIZER AND PESTICIDEJanuary 2025June 2025Allow510NoNo
19034484Dual Shower Head ApparatusJanuary 2025December 2025Abandon1110NoNo
18912267SCREEN-TYPE ELECTRIC VEHICLE FIRE SUPPRESSION DEVICEOctober 2024January 2025Allow410NoNo
18670662INTELLIGENT AIR-ASSISTED SPRAYING DEVICE FOR ORCHARDS AND SPRAYING METHOD THEREOFMay 2024February 2025Allow820NoNo
18318611Sprinkler With Internal CompartmentsMay 2023July 2025Allow2640YesNo
18018319CHEMICAL SPRAYING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR OPERATING SAMEJanuary 2023March 2026Abandon3701NoNo
18098297Tandem ShowerJanuary 2023December 2025Abandon3510NoNo
17804301ELECTROSTATIC COATING DEVICEMay 2022August 2025Allow3930NoNo
17720950Power Washing AssemblyApril 2022February 2025Allow3410NoNo
17767310ADMIXING SYSTEM FOR FIRE-EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS AND METHOD FOR OPERATING SUCH AN ADMIXING SYSTEMApril 2022January 2026Allow4520YesYes
17658434Helicopter TankApril 2022January 2025Abandon3410NoNo
17765455AUTOMATIC FIRE-EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CABLE TUNNELMarch 2022September 2025Abandon4220NoNo
17706906BATTERY ARRANGEMENT HAVING AN EXTINGUISHING AGENT SUPPLY DEVICE, MOTOR VEHICLE, AND METHOD FOR PROTECTING A BATTERYMarch 2022August 2025Abandon4020NoNo
17656992FLOW-FOCUSING SEED TREATMENT DEVICE AND METHODSMarch 2022April 2025Abandon3710NoNo
17690439SUSPENSION ASSEMBLY FOR SPRAY BOOM OF AN AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT AND AGRICULTURAL WORK VEHICLEMarch 2022October 2025Abandon4330YesNo
17635890GUN CONTAINING HANGER WITH LIGHTING FUNCTION FOR POWDER COATING APPLICATIONSFebruary 2022September 2025Abandon4330NoNo
17671332INSULATED COVER FOR FIRE SPRINKLERFebruary 2022January 2025Abandon3510NoNo
17671318MULTI-DUMP VALVE FOR RELEASING LIQUID FROM A CONTAINERFebruary 2022March 2025Abandon3710NoNo
17581524DIFFUSER INCLUDING SCENTED POLYMERIC BODYJanuary 2022March 2026Abandon5041YesNo
17626573SPRINKLER HEAD ADAPTERJanuary 2022September 2025Abandon4421NoNo
17574348CROP SPRAYING VEHICLEJanuary 2022February 2026Allow4950YesNo
17626108A PAPER STRAW COMPRISING A FLEXIBLE PORTIONJanuary 2022November 2024Abandon3501NoNo
17557631Inflatable and Scented Flower And VaseDecember 2021May 2025Abandon4120NoNo
17549700STRAWDecember 2021April 2025Allow4050YesNo
17616133SPRAY APPLICATION DEVICEDecember 2021November 2025Abandon4831NoNo
17614784ELECTROSTATIC SPRAY DEVICENovember 2021November 2024Abandon3610NoNo
17614882CARTRIDGE FOR ELECTROSTATIC SPRAYING DEVICENovember 2021April 2025Abandon4010NoNo
17604889WATER JET KIT FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSESOctober 2021September 2025Allow4740NoNo
17502204Multipurpose Aerial Sprinkler SystemOctober 2021May 2025Abandon4321NoNo
17594361Flying Object, Flying Object System, and Method For Painting Object to Be PaintedOctober 2021March 2026Allow5361YesNo
17497447ROTOR-SUSPENDED BOOM SPRAYER WITH WIDE SPRAY BOOM AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOFOctober 2021May 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17593941MOUNTING OF EXTERNAL CHARGING PROBE ON ELECTROSTATIC SPRAY GUNSeptember 2021October 2024Allow3711YesNo
17483116PAINT SPRAY NOZZLE FOR A PAINT SPRAY SYSTEMSeptember 2021June 2025Abandon4521YesNo
17482665SANITARY FITTING HAVING AT LEAST ONE FIRST FLUID OUTLET AND AT LEAST ONE SECOND FLUID OUTLETSeptember 2021March 2024Abandon2910YesNo
17439764SYSTEM FOR MOVING A PRODUCT APPLICATION NOZZLESeptember 2021September 2024Abandon3610NoNo
17437136AERATORSeptember 2021January 2026Abandon5240YesYes
17429642ULTRASONIC ATOMIZATION APPARATUSAugust 2021December 2025Allow5260NoNo
17390996FIRE FOUNTAINAugust 2021June 2024Abandon3410NoNo
17378785TELESCOPIC SHOWERJuly 2021March 2025Abandon4430NoNo
17365218NOZZLE UNITJuly 2021November 2024Abandon4020YesNo
17352599MULTIFUNCTIONAL SHOWER ARMJune 2021November 2025Abandon5340YesNo
17309725FUNCTION CONTROL FOR AN ELECTROHYDRODYNAMIC ATOMIZERJune 2021April 2025Allow4630NoNo
17414099VARIABLE-RATE SPRAYING NOZZLE DEVICE AND SPRAYING DRONEJune 2021October 2024Abandon4010NoNo
17162999FaucetJanuary 2021June 2024Abandon4010NoNo
17140113MULTIFUNCTIONAL SHOWER DEVICE FOR TOP SPRAY AND HANDHELDJanuary 2021March 2024Abandon3910NoNo
17251022ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED HYDRAULIC CLEANING SYSTEMDecember 2020April 2025Abandon5230NoNo
17056886DRIP EMITTER FOR PERIODIC, VOLUMETRICALLY TIMED, IRRIGATIONNovember 2020December 2024Abandon4911NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner HO, ANNA THI.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
10.7%
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

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

Examiner HO, ANNA THI - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner HO, ANNA THI works in Art Unit 3752 and has examined 25 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 24.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 43 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner HO, ANNA THI's allowance rate of 24.0% places them in the 3% 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 HO, ANNA THI receive 2.44 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 71% 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 HO, ANNA THI is 43 months. This places the examiner in the 17% 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 +19.9% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by HO, ANNA THI. This interview benefit is in the 63% 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, 15.8% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 12% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show lower effectiveness with this examiner compared to others. Consider whether a continuation application might be more strategic, especially if you need to add new matter or significantly broaden claims.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 30.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 43% 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.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 99% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.

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. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). 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, 200.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 100% 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 44% 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 47% 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.
  • Request pre-appeal conferences: PACs are highly effective with this examiner. Before filing a full appeal brief, request a PAC to potentially resolve issues without full PTAB review.
  • 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.