LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ALYAA T MAZYAD
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Alyaa T Mazyad

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 149 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAY 2019
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Alyaa T Mazyad has allowed 101 of 149 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

68% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2118 · 61%AU 2116 · 76%AU 2187 · 83%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Alyaa T Mazyad holds a public record across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 149 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 68%, reflecting 101 allowed and 48 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 61% to 76% across the examiner's art units, indicating variation in outcomes by subject area within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates data across multiple art units and describes the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines statistics from multiple art units into a single profile. The overall allowance rate represents the aggregate of decided cases across all units and reflects the examiner's historical pattern. This aggregate figure does not predict outcomes for any specific application. Individual art units may show different rates; the range shown here indicates that variation exists. Pooled data describes the past record and supports historical context 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 →

// 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 2118
90 APPS · 61% ALLOWANCE
61% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION55 / 35 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.7 moart unit avg 22.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.3 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility28% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)73%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness28%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW83%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW37%+46 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 47 decided applications with an interview and 43 without.

ART UNIT 2116
41 APPS · 76% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

76% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION31 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.7 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.4 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility29% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)61%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness21%

Based on 41 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2187
18 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION15 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.7 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.1 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility18% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)82%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness47%

Based on 18 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Alyaa T Mazyad

  • What is Alyaa T Mazyad's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 68% over 149 decided applications, comprising 101 allowed and 48 abandoned applications. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's record across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The examiner's public record spans 3 art units (2116, 2118, 2187) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 61% to 76% across the examiner's art units, showing variation in outcomes by subject area. The pooled 68% figure is an aggregate across all units.
  • What does this pooled record tell me about my application?
    The pooled record describes the examiner's historical allowance rate and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Outcomes depend on individual claim scope, prior art, and examination factors unique to each case.
◈ 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 Alyaa T Mazyad 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: 149 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