Examiner Aniss Chad has allowed 277 of 396 decided applications (70%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Aniss Chad maintains a public record across 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 396 disposed applications, 277 were allowed, yielding a 70% allowance rate. The examiner's allowance rates across art units range from 67% to 90%, reflecting variation in the decided record between the units covered. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across both art units and describes the examiner's historical record only.
A pooled record combines statistics from multiple art units into a single view. The overall allowance rate represents the aggregate of decided applications across all units and reflects past outcomes, not predictions for any particular application. Individual art units may show different rates; the range shown here indicates that variation. Pooled figures are useful for understanding an examiner's overall historical record but do not forecast the outcome of any specific case.
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.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 118 decided applications with an interview and 229 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Based on 49 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Aniss Chad 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: 396 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