LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/AHMED M ABRAHAM
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Ahmed M Abraham

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 141 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION SEP 2018
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Ahmed M Abraham has allowed 87 of 141 decided applications (62%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

62% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2154 · 70%AU 2166 · 62%AU 2165 · 50%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Ahmed M Abraham maintains a pooled allowance rate of 62% across 141 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His public record spans three art units: 2154, 2165, and 2166. Of the 141 decided applications, 87 were allowed and 54 were abandoned. The allowance rate across these art units ranges from 50% to 70%, reflecting variation in the examiner's record within TC 2100. This pooled figure represents the aggregate outcome across all three art units and does not predict the outcome of any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's activity across three separate art units within TC 2100. The 62% allowance rate is computed from all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across these units combined. Pooled figures describe past decisions and offer a statistical snapshot of the examiner's record; they are not predictions of outcomes in any specific case. Different art units may reflect different substantive areas and examination patterns, which the pooled rate does not isolate.

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 →

// BY ART UNIT

The record, art unit by art unit.

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.

◈ PRIMARY · ART UNIT 2154
54 APPS · 70% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

70% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION38 / 16 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.7 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.9 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility32% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)82%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%
ART UNIT 2166
47 APPS · 62% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

62% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION29 / 18 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.4 moart unit avg 23.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.9 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility56% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)60%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%

Based on 47 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2165
40 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION20 / 20 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.4 moart unit avg 22.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.3 moart unit avg 39.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility60% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)83%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%

Based on 40 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ahmed M Abraham

  • What is Ahmed M Abraham's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 62%, calculated from 87 allowed applications out of 141 total disposed applications across all three art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The examiner's public record spans three art units (2154, 2165, and 2166) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across his art units?
    Yes. Across the three art units, allowance rates range from 50% to 70%, indicating variation in outcomes by art unit.
  • What does this pooled rate mean for my application?
    The pooled rate describes past decisions across all three art units combined and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ RESPONDING TO AN OFFICE ACTION

Strategy, not paperwork. Talk to the attorney doing the work.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. Book a consultation to discuss your matter with the attorney who would handle it.

Book a 30-minute consultation →
METHODOLOGY & DISCLOSURES

Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Ahmed M Abraham 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: 141 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