Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19170420 | System and Method for Volume Insonation | April 2025 | February 2026 | Allow | 10 | 2 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 18959838 | APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ULTRASOUND SPINAL CORD STIMULATION | November 2024 | February 2026 | Allow | 15 | 0 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18936083 | DEVICE AND METHOD FOR IN VIVO FLOW CYTOMETRY USING THE DETECTION OF PHOTOACOUSTIC WAVES | November 2024 | March 2026 | Allow | 16 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18885023 | TREATMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TREATING CELLULITE AND FOR PROVIDING OTHER TREATMENTS | September 2024 | February 2026 | Abandon | 17 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18718286 | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PARAMETERISING A HIGH-INTENSITY FOCUSED ULTRASOUND TREATMENT DEVICE | June 2024 | December 2025 | Allow | 18 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18717199 | METHOD FOR INDICATING AN INCISION TRAJECTORY BY A LASER OF AN INTRAOPERATIVE IMAGING SYSTEM | June 2024 | March 2026 | Abandon | 21 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 18496330 | ULTRASOUND MODULATION OF BRAIN ACTIVITY | October 2023 | October 2025 | Allow | 23 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18467552 | MULTI-BEAM NEUROMODULATION TECHNIQUES | September 2023 | November 2025 | Allow | 26 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18238446 | TARGETED NEUROMODULATION TO IMPROVE NEUROPSYCHIATRIC FUNCTION | August 2023 | March 2026 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18272774 | NON-INVASIVE ULTRASOUND NEUROMODULATION FOR VISION RESTORATION FROM RETINAL DISEASES | July 2023 | January 2026 | Allow | 30 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 18182363 | DETECTING DEVICE AND MEASURING APPARATUS | March 2023 | February 2026 | Abandon | 35 | 2 | 0 | No | No |
| 18088027 | BLOOD PRESSURE MEASURING METHOD AND A BLOOD PRESSURE MEASURING SYSYEM | December 2022 | January 2026 | Abandon | 37 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 17884177 | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING POSITION OF LONG MEDICAL DEVICE | August 2022 | November 2025 | Allow | 39 | 3 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17544892 | Method for Measuring Pre-Ejection Period | December 2021 | February 2026 | Allow | 50 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 17145730 | METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TREATMENT OF INTRACRANIAL HEMORRHAGES | January 2021 | March 2026 | Allow | 60 | 8 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17094450 | SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPAIRING SMOOTH MUSCLE TISSUE FUNCTION | November 2020 | February 2026 | Abandon | 60 | 4 | 0 | Yes | Yes |
| 16323567 | DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MONITORING OF PERIPHERAL ARTERIAL PERFUSION OF A SUBJECT | February 2019 | October 2025 | Allow | 60 | 7 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 14784961 | ACQUIRING CERVICAL IMAGES | October 2015 | September 2018 | Allow | 35 | 6 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 12786232 | TIME-REVERSED MIRRORING ELECTRO-MAGNETIC ACOUSTIC TREATMENT SYSTEM | May 2010 | August 2012 | Allow | 27 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11723689 | ULTRASONIC ENDOSCOPE | March 2007 | January 2012 | Allow | 58 | 4 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11520091 | METHOD FOR ACQUIRING CARDIAC IMAGE DATA | September 2006 | December 2010 | Allow | 51 | 5 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 11382736 | DISPOSABLE LIGHT SOURCE PATCH FOR ENHANCED VISUALIZATION OF SUBCUTANEOUS STRUCTURES | May 2006 | December 2010 | Allow | 55 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC.
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.
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.
⚠ 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 NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC works in Art Unit 3797 and has examined 9 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 88.9%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 55 months.
Examiner NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC's allowance rate of 88.9% places them in the 70% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC receive 4.67 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 99% 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.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC is 55 months. This places the examiner in the 2% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -12.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC. This interview benefit is in the 3% 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.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 15.6% 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.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 18.2% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 21% 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.
When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 0.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 24% percentile among all examiners. Note: Pre-appeal conferences show limited success with this examiner compared to others. While still worth considering, be prepared to proceed with a full appeal brief if the PAC does not result in favorable action.
This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 50.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 21% percentile among all examiners. 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.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 22.2% of allowed cases (in the 98% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.
Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 25.0% of allowed cases (in the 94% 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.
Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:
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.