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

Examiner Angie M Badawi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 322 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAY 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Angie M Badawi has allowed 205 of 322 decided applications (64%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

64% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2179 · 71%AU 2172 · 56%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Angie M Badawi maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 322 decided applications, the examiner issued 205 allowances, yielding a 64% allowance rate. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 56% to 71%. The record spans both art units 2172 and 2179 with a substantial body of work. This pooled figure reflects the examiner's overall disposal history and does not constitute a prediction for any future application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled examiner record aggregates statistics across multiple art units to create a composite profile of past dispositions. The overall allowance rate and the range across individual art units are historical measures only—they describe what occurred in closed applications and are not predictive of outcomes in any specific pending case. Individual art-unit records may differ from the pooled average.

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 2179
190 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE
71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION115 / 46 / 29allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.9 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.7 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility42% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness85% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness76%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW78%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW58%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 108 decided applications with an interview and 53 without.

ART UNIT 2172
161 APPS · 56% ALLOWANCE
56% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION90 / 71 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY57.7 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility64% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)63%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness75%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW77%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW35%+42 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 79 decided applications with an interview and 82 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Angie M Badawi

  • What is Examiner Badawi's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 64%, calculated over 322 decided applications (205 allowed and 117 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    The record spans 2 art units: 2172 and 2179, both within TC 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 56% to 71% across the examiner's art units with substantial records.
  • Is the pooled allowance rate a prediction for my application?
    No. The pooled rate is a historical aggregate of past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific pending 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 Angie M Badawi 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: 351 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