Examiner Alan Otto has allowed 308 of 441 decided applications (70%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Alan Otto holds a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 441 disposed applications, his allowance rate is 70%, reflecting 308 allowed and 133 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 56% to 82% across these art units, indicating variation in outcomes by art unit. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate record and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application.
This record aggregates performance across multiple art units in TC 2100. The pooled allowance rate of 70% describes historical outcomes on decided applications across all assigned units combined. Aggregate figures describe the past record only—they are not predictions of outcomes on any specific application or indication of how any single case will be handled. Individual art-unit records are tracked separately.
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 input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 128 decided applications with an interview and 141 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 29 decided applications with an interview and 105 without.
Primarily examines data-processing methods for specific functions, and processing data by its order or content.
Based on 38 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Alan Otto 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: 471 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