Examiner Ahmad M El-Bkaily has allowed 22 of 77 decided applications (29%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Ahmad M El-Bkaily maintains a public record across one art unit in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 77 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 22 and abandoned 55, yielding an allowance rate of 29% across all decided cases. This rate represents outcomes on applications that have reached final disposition. The pooled record spans a single art unit within TC 2100, aggregating all application outcomes in that assignment.
This examiner's pooled record aggregates all applications across assigned art units. The 29% allowance rate describes historical dispositions—applications that have concluded—and reflects past outcomes only. Pooled figures combine different art units and represent aggregate data. These statistics characterize what has occurred in closed cases and are not predictions about pending applications or any individual prosecution.
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 general computer details, and program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 37 decided applications with an interview and 40 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Ahmad M El-Bkaily 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: 77 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