Examiner Amelia L Tapp has allowed 378 of 559 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Amelia L Tapp has a pooled allowance rate of 68% across 559 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Her record spans 4 art units: 2144, 2176, 2177, and 2179. Allowance rates across these art units range from 51% to 92%, reflecting variation in the mix of applications examined. The 68% figure represents applications that were allowed as a share of all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned), excluding pending matters.
This pooled record aggregates Examiner Tapp's examination activity across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 68% allowance rate describes her past record on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Because the record combines different art units, the aggregate figure masks individual unit performance. Individual art-unit rates are available separately and may differ substantially from the pooled figure.
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 147 decided applications with an interview and 112 without.
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 62 decided applications with an interview and 103 without.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 32 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.
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 25 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Amelia L Tapp 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: 559 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