Examiner Aaron C Perez Daple has allowed 26 of 49 decided applications (53%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Aaron C Perez Daple has a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning two art units. Across 49 disposed applications, 26 were allowed and 23 were abandoned, for an allowance rate of 53%. This rate is based on decided cases only and does not reflect pending applications. The record aggregates activity across multiple art units within TC 2100, presenting a pooled view of dispositions over the examiner's practice in this technology center.
A pooled record aggregates data across all art units in which an examiner works. The allowance rate shown here—53% across 49 decided applications—reflects cumulative outcomes and is a historical summary, not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Different art units may have different allowance rates and case volumes. Pooled figures describe past record only.
These are aggregate statistics from this examiner's past public record — not predictions about any specific application. The per-art-unit figures below show how the record varies across art units. Our approach to patent prosecution →
Each section benchmarks this examiner against that art unit's average. Figures are this examiner's own public record within the art unit; the overall rate above pools them.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Aaron C Perez Daple has a public record within Technology Center 2100. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated June 25, 2026. The overall allowance rate is total allowed divided by total decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across all art units — not an average of the per-art-unit rates; pending applications are excluded. Figures are rounded for display. Pooled sample: 49 applications.
Lynch LLP is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Examiner statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data.
These statistics describe past examiner behavior and do not predict the outcome of any particular application. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Where this page compares an examiner's allowance rate to an art-unit average, that comparison is a factual description of the public record, not a characterization of any individual examiner's conduct or competence.
This page is for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by viewing it. Full disclaimers →
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING — Sean Lynch, Partner, Lynch LLP