LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ANIL KHATRI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Anil Khatri

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 1,286 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Anil Khatri has allowed 1,181 of 1,286 decided applications (92%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

92% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2191 · 92%AU 2197 · 97%AU 2193 · 74%AU 2124 · 89%AU 2122 · 83%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Anil Khatri maintains a public record across five art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 1,286 disposed applications, the pooled allowance rate is 92%, with 1,181 allowed and 105 abandoned. The allowance rate ranges from 74% to 97% across the art units in which he maintains a substantial record. This aggregate figure reflects decided applications only and does not account for pending filings.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, creating a composite picture rather than unit-specific performance. The 92% allowance rate describes historical outcomes across all units combined and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Ranges reflect variation among individual art units; the aggregate masks this variation. Pooled figures are most useful for understanding overall record breadth and past disposition patterns.

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 2191
1,185 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines software engineering, and error detection, correction, and monitoring.

92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 76%
DISPOSITION1073 / 90 / 22allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.4 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30 moart unit avg 41.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)41%
§103 — Obviousness73% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness48%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW99%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW80%+19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 755 decided applications with an interview and 408 without.

ART UNIT 2197
60 APPS · 97% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution, and software engineering.

97% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION58 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.9 moart unit avg 26 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.7 moart unit avg 44.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility46% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)52%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%
ART UNIT 2193
38 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines software engineering, and error detection, correction, and monitoring.

74% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 70%
DISPOSITION28 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION36.2 moart unit avg 30.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.3 moart unit avg 44 mo
ART UNIT 2124
19 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION17 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION35.1 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.6 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
ART UNIT 2122
6 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION5 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION10.2 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY16.7 moart unit avg 39.3 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Anil Khatri

  • What is Examiner Khatri's overall allowance rate?
    92% across 1,286 disposed applications pooled from five art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Five art units: 2122, 2124, 2191, 2193, and 2197, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. Across the art units with substantial records, allowance rates range from 74% to 97%. The 92% pooled figure is an aggregate across all five units.
  • What does the pooled record mean for my application?
    The pooled figures describe past outcomes and do not predict the outcome of any specific application. Art-unit-specific records are available separately and may differ from the pooled rate.
◈ 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 Anil Khatri 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: 1,308 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