Examiner Ba Huynh has allowed 151 of 223 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Ba Huynh maintains a public record spanning 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 223 disposed applications, 151 were allowed and 72 abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 68% over the decided count. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate record across all assigned art units and reflects historical dispositions only.
This examiner's record is pooled across multiple art units, meaning the allowance rate aggregates outcomes from different subject-matter groups. The 68% figure describes what occurred in past applications across those units combined. Aggregate historical rates are not predictions of outcomes in any individual application or art unit.
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 56 decided applications with an interview and 156 without.
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 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: 223 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