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

Examiner Ajay M Bhatia

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 146 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAR 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Ajay M Bhatia has allowed 58 of 146 decided applications (40%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

40% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2145 · 43%AU 2142 · 3%AU 2117 · 60%AU 2156 · 75%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Ajay M Bhatia has a public record across 4 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 146 disposed applications, 58 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 40%. The allowance rate across his art units ranges from 3% to 60%, reflecting variation in outcomes within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates decisions across all four art units and describes his past record without predicting outcomes in any specific pending application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's decisions across multiple art units and subject areas within a technology center. The overall allowance rate (40% here) is a historical summary of decided cases, not a prediction about any individual application. The range (3% to 60%) shows that outcomes vary across different art units. Pooled statistics describe past performance; they do not forecast results in any particular case or art unit.

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 2145
76 APPS · 43% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

43% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION33 / 43 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION37 moart unit avg 26.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY58 moart unit avg 45.3 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW52%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW39%+13 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 27 decided applications with an interview and 49 without.

ART UNIT 2142
32 APPS · 3% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

3% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION1 / 31 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.6 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY50.9 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)87%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness71%

Based on 32 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2117
30 APPS · 60% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

60% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 74%
DISPOSITION18 / 12 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.1 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.8 moart unit avg 33.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility40% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)45%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%

Based on 30 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2156
9 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION6 / 2 / 1allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.8 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.8 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility100% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 9 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ajay M Bhatia

  • What is Ajay M Bhatia's overall allowance rate?
    40% across 146 disposed applications pooled from all art units. This is the percentage of decided applications that were allowed, excluding pending cases.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    4 art units (2117, 2142, 2145, 2156) within Technology Center 2100.
  • How much does the allowance rate vary across his art units?
    The allowance rate ranges from 3% to 60% across his art units, reflecting variation in outcomes within TC 2100.
  • Does the pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate and does not predict the outcome of any specific pending application.
◈ 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 Ajay M Bhatia 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: 147 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