LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ANDALIB FT LODHI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Andalib Ft Lodhi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 387 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION APR 2022
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Andalib Ft Lodhi has allowed 275 of 387 decided applications (71%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

71% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2162 · 65%AU 2163 · 81%AU 2169 · 87%AU 2154 · 69%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Andalib Ft Lodhi maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 387 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 275 and abandoned 112, yielding an allowance rate of 71%. Across the examiner's art units, allowance rates range from 65% to 87%. This pooled figure aggregates decisions made in different art units and reflects the examiner's historical record without constituting a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record combines data from multiple art units within TC 2100 into a single aggregate statistic. The 71% allowance rate describes past decisions on 387 closed applications and is not a prediction of outcomes on new filings. The range of 65% to 87% across art units shows variation within the examiner's broader portfolio. Aggregate figures describe historical patterns; individual application outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and other case-specific factors.

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 2162
237 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION155 / 82 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.5 moart unit avg 23.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47.7 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility56% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness31%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW74%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW60%+14 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 151 without.

ART UNIT 2163
69 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION56 / 13 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27 moart unit avg 23.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.9 moart unit avg 40.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility75% · art unit 51%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 78%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW76%+15 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 23 decided applications with an interview and 46 without.

ART UNIT 2169
46 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION40 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.8 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY64.3 moart unit avg 40 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility47% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)76%
§103 — Obviousness87% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%

Based on 46 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2154
35 APPS · 69% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

69% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION24 / 11 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.7 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.1 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility44% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)83%
§103 — Obviousness61% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness11%

Based on 35 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Andalib Ft Lodhi

  • What is Examiner Lodhi's overall allowance rate?
    71% across 387 disposed applications (275 allowed, 112 abandoned) pooled across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    4 art units (2154, 2162, 2163, 2169) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 65% to 87% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in the different technical areas within TC 2100.
  • Is the 71% allowance rate a prediction for my application?
    No. This figure describes historical decisions 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 Andalib Ft Lodhi 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: 387 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