LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Ba Huynh

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 223 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JAN 2013
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
68%vs 52% weighted peer average+16 pts

Examiner Ba Huynh has allowed 151 of 223 decided applications in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

allowed151abandoned72pending0· pending excluded from the rate
The weighted peer average (52%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 14, 2026
AU 2179 · 67%AU 2173 · 82%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Patent Examiner Ba Huynh has a public record spanning 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 68%. This figure represents the share of applications that were allowed, out of all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined). The allowance rate is based on final decisions and does not include pending applications. This pooled record aggregates outcomes across all art units under this examiner's jurisdiction.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units, creating a single snapshot of historical decisions. The allowance-rate figure describes what occurred in past applications and reflects the combined pattern across different subject areas. Pooled statistics are descriptive of past record only and are not predictions of outcomes in any specific pending application. Individual art units may vary; detailed per-unit data appears separately on this site.

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
212 APPS · 67% ALLOWANCE
67% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION142 / 70 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION32.4 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY59.7 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
REJECTION RATE = SHARE OF THIS EXAMINER'S APPLICATIONS THAT DREW ≥1 OFFICE-ACTION REJECTION IN WHICH THE GROUND APPEARS

Grounds can co-occur, so the four don't sum to 100%. The art-unit figure is the unweighted mean across examiners in the art unit; §102 and §112 carry no art-unit benchmark.

§101 — Subject-matter eligibility21%art unit 39%18 pts
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)34%no art-unit benchmark
§103 — Obviousness76%art unit 86%10 pts
§112 — Written description & definiteness28%no art-unit benchmark
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW70%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW66%+4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 56 decided applications with an interview and 156 without.

ART UNIT 2173
11 APPS · 82% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
82% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION9 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18 moart unit avg 25.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.9 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ba Huynh

  • What is Examiner Ba Huynh's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 68%, representing the share of allowed applications out of all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications, pooled across the examiner's art units. This is a historical figure based on completed decisions.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Examiner Ba Huynh has a public record spanning 2 art units (2173, 2179) within TC 2100.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate tell me about my application?
    The pooled rate describes the examiner's past record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Each application is examined individually on its merits.
  • What subject matter does this examiner handle?
    This examiner works in TC 2100, which covers Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
◈ HOW LYNCH LLP CAN HELP

Where to go next.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. These are general resources about the firm's services — not advice about this examiner or any specific application.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.PTAB trials and patent appealsAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Building a patent portfolioHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Booking a consultationFree and paid consultation options across the firm's attorneys.
◈ 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 Ba Huynh 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 July 14, 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: 223 applications.

Rejection rates. Each §-rate is the share of this examiner's applications that drew at least one office-action rejection in which that statutory ground appears; applications with no rejection on record are excluded, and because grounds can co-occur the four do not sum to 100%. The art-unit figure beside each is the unweighted mean of the per-examiner rates across the art unit, published for §101 and §103 only. Beside the overall allowance rate we show a benchmark: for a single-art-unit examiner it is exactly that art unit's average, labeled “art-unit average”; for an examiner spanning several art units it is the “weighted peer average” — the per-art-unit averages, weighted by this examiner's application count in each — labeled distinctly because it is a blended figure, not any single art unit's average. Both are built from the same per-art-unit averages the panels show.

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