Skip to main content

Life Sciences is now live. See how →

Patent Examiner Shibin Liang

Art Unit 1741 · Plastics Shaping & Glass Manufacturing · Tech Center 1700 · 290 applications filed 2021–2026

⚑ Hard · harder than 80% of examiners● Free examiner data

Shibin Liang is a USPTO patent examiner in Art Unit 1741 (Plastics Shaping & Glass Manufacturing) with 290 applications from filing years 2021–2026. Examiner Liang's allowance rate is 63.9%, below the 82.8% USPTO average for applications filed in the same years. The examiner ranks harder than 80% of examiners. In 2022, decided applications with an examiner interview were allowed 10.8 percentage points more often than those without.

Draft a response to Examiner LiangSee the strategy data ↓

Data through October 2026 from USPTO Patent Center (formerly PAIR) · Methodology

Overview

Free
Difficulty · Hard
harder than 80% of examiners
Easier80th percentileHarder
Allowance rate vs peers
Examiner Liang63.9%
Art Unit 174174.0%
USPTO average82.8%
Allowance rate
63.9%
▼ USPTO avg 82.8%
Applications
290
filing years 2021–2026
First-action allowance
6.3%
patented with no rejection
Abandoned
23.8%
share of applications
Avg office actions
2.0
USPTO avg 1.2
Days to first OA
557
▼ USPTO 606
RCE rate
35.5%
USPTO 18.1%
Interview rate
26.9%
USPTO 25.5%

Examiner details

  • Art unit1741 · Plastics Shaping & Glass Manufacturing
  • Title / gradePatent Examiner · GS-13
  • Service8 years
  • Phone(571) 272-8811
  • Email[email protected]
  • LocationAlexandria, VA 22314
  • In USPTO recordsLIANG, SHIBIN
Examines (USPC classes)
264 · Plastic & Nonmetallic Article Shaping or Treating: Processes425 · Plastic Article or Earthenware Shaping or Treating: Apparatus

How to improve your odds with Examiner Liang

  • The data favors an interview. Interviewed cases were allowed more often in all 3 measured years, by 4.1 to 36.8 points.
  • The timeline runs ahead of the norm. First office action averages 557 days vs the 606-day USPTO norm.
  • Expect a §103. Obviousness is the most-issued rejection (335), and applicants overcame it 40.4% of the time.
  • The data favors an RCE here. Cases with an RCE were allowed more often in all 3 measured years, by 13.1 to 21.7 points.

Historical patterns from this examiner's past cases, shown for general information. This is not legal advice and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Decisions about interviews, RCEs, and claim strategy should be made with a licensed patent attorney or agent.

Rejection patterns & how they get overcome

Free
§101 Eligibility13 issued · 30.8% overcome
§102 Novelty126 issued · 54.9% overcome
§103 Obviousness335 issued · 40.4% overcome
§112 Definiteness & disclosure84 issued · 69.7% overcome
How applicants traverse §103 rejections🔒 Members

Of the 53 winning responses to Examiner Liang's §103 rejections that Boundly has classified, 47 (89%) amended the claims and argued, 4 argued without amending, and 2 amended without arguing. Each winning response, with its arguments and claim amendments, is in the file wrapper.

Read the winning §103 argumentsFull REMARKS, amendments, claim trees & redlines from the file wrappers
Start free

Just got an office action from Examiner Liang?

Draft your response with Examiner Liang's record and Art Unit 1741's history in view, including the rejection patterns, the interview record, and the arguments that have overcome them. See the office action response tools in AI Studio.

Open AI Studio free →

RCE behavior

Allowance after a Request for Continued Examination versus without one, per year. Use it to judge whether an RCE is worth the cost in front of Examiner Liang.

YearRCE rateAllowance w/ RCEAllowance w/oDelta
202343.7%83.3%62.5%+20.8pp
202247.9%69.4%56.3%+13.1pp
202140.8%70.0%48.3%+21.7pp

Recent outcomes

Free🔒 Case detail for members
App #TitleOutcomeOAsArguments & redline
18/725645Apparatus and Method for Manufacturing Separator for Fuel CellPatented1🔒 View
18/016381Manufacturing Device Control Method, Resin Container Manufacturing Method, Manufacturing Device Control Device and Resin Container Manufacturing Device Having SamePatented2🔒 View
17/854384Processing Apparatus for Composite Material and Processing Method for Composite MaterialPatented6🔒 View
17/823118Tire Tread Production Line and Method for Manufacturing a Tire TreadAbandoned5🔒 View
See all 290 applications with full file-wrapper detailOffice action text, attorney arguments, amendments & claim-by-claim track changes
Start free

Art Unit 1741 technology

Plastics shaping & moldingGlass manufacturingGlass strengthening & etchingSmoking & vaping devicesTop CPC C03B · B29C · C03C
About this examiner. Shibin Liang examines in Art Unit 1741 (Plastics Shaping & Glass Manufacturing, Tech Center 1700). The art unit's docket includes plastics shaping & molding, glass manufacturing, glass strengthening & etching, and smoking & vaping devices.

Frequently asked questions

What is Examiner Shibin Liang's allowance rate?
Examiner Liang's allowance rate is 63.9%, compared with 82.8% across the USPTO and 74.0% in Art Unit 1741 for applications filed in the same years. That rate ranks Examiner Liang harder than 80% of examiners.
Is Examiner Liang a hard examiner?
Somewhat. Examiner Liang ranks harder than 80% of examiners, in the 80th difficulty percentile (hard). Examiner Liang has a 63.9% allowance rate versus 82.8% across the USPTO and 74.0% in Art Unit 1741, 2.0 office actions per application versus 1.2, and an RCE rate of 35.5% versus 18.1% across the USPTO, for applications filed in the same years.
Do examiner interviews help with Examiner Liang?
In this examiner's record, yes. Decided applications with an interview were allowed more often in each of the 3 measured years, by 4.1 to 36.8 percentage points. In 2022, 69.0% of decided applications with an interview were allowed, versus 58.2% of those without.
What is Examiner Liang's most common rejection?
§103 obviousness, issued 335 times in the data. Applicants overcame it 40.4% of the time. Of the 53 winning responses Boundly has classified, 47 amended the claims and argued.
Is an RCE worth filing with Examiner Liang?
In this examiner's record, yes. Decided applications with an RCE were allowed more often in each of the 3 measured years, by 13.1 to 21.7 percentage points. In 2022, 69.4% of decided applications with an RCE were allowed, versus 56.3% of those without one.
How long until the first office action from Examiner Liang?
About 557 days on average, versus 606 days across the USPTO for applications filed in the same years.
How do I contact Examiner Shibin Liang?
Examiner Liang can be reached by phone at (571) 272-8811 or by email at [email protected]. The examiner's direct line is also listed at the end of the examiner's office actions.

Put Examiner Liang's data to work on your next response.

Full file-wrapper detail, winning arguments, and AI-assisted drafting in one workspace.

Start free
Statistics are computed by Boundly Prosecution Intel from USPTO Patent Center (formerly PAIR) file wrappers for filing years 2021–2026, refreshed regularly. Allowance rate (sometimes called grant rate) is the share of disposed applications that issued as patents. Office actions here are non-final and final rejections, so restriction requirements and allowances are not counted. USPTO benchmarks are weighted to each examiner's mix of filing years, and art-unit benchmarks to the art units and filing years of the examiner's own applications, so they compare like for like. The difficulty percentile ranks examiners, each counted once, so it can point the other way from the USPTO average, which counts applications. See how each number is computed. The year-by-year interview and RCE tables show up to four recent filing years, leaving out the newest one and any year with fewer than ten applications or five decided applications on either side. Historical data is provided for informational purposes only. Past examiner behavior does not guarantee future outcomes, and nothing here is legal advice or a substitute for advice from a licensed patent attorney or agent. Are you Shibin Liang, or see an error? Request a correction.