LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ARPAN P SAVLA
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Arpan P Savla

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 364 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 Arpan P Savla has allowed 221 of 364 decided applications (61%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

61% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2185 · 53%AU 2138 · 66%AU 2188 · 68%AU 2137 · 65%AU 2145 · 43%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Arpan P Savla maintains a public record spanning 5 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 364 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 61%. The allowance rate ranges from 53% to 68% across these art units, reflecting variation in the examiner's record by subject matter within TC 2100. A total of 221 applications were allowed and 143 abandoned. These figures represent the examiner's pooled historical record and do not constitute a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units in TC 2100. The 61% allowance rate reflects decisions on 364 applications pooled across all units. The range of 53% to 68% indicates that allowance rates vary by individual art unit; this aggregate figure describes past outcomes and is not a prediction of how any particular application will be examined or decided.

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 2185
142 APPS · 53% ALLOWANCE
53% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION75 / 67 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.2 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.2 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)42%
§103 — Obviousness69% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness28%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW53%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW53%0 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 43 decided applications with an interview and 99 without.

ART UNIT 2138
125 APPS · 66% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

66% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION83 / 42 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.6 moart unit avg 19.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY58.2 moart unit avg 32.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility41% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)76%
§103 — Obviousness80% · art unit 71%
§112 — Written description & definiteness57%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW71%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW60%+11 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 70 decided applications with an interview and 55 without.

ART UNIT 2188
59 APPS · 68% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

68% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION40 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.8 moart unit avg 26.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY57.8 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)62%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 74%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW82%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW59%+23 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 22 decided applications with an interview and 37 without.

ART UNIT 2137
52 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 68%
DISPOSITION20 / 11 / 21allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.7 moart unit avg 25.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.7 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility35% · art unit 25%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)90%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness80%
ART UNIT 2145
7 APPS · 43% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

43% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION3 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.7 moart unit avg 26.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48.4 moart unit avg 45.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility43% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness71%

Based on 7 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Arpan P Savla

  • What is Examiner Savla's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 61% over 364 disposed applications pooled across all art units.
  • In how many art units does this examiner have a record?
    The examiner has a record spanning 5 art units within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 53% to 68% across the examiner's art units, reflecting differences in the record by subject matter within the technology center.
◈ 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 Arpan P Savla 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: 385 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