Examiner Barbara Burgess Anyan has allowed 16 of 60 decided applications (27%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Barbara Burgess Anyan maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 60 disposed applications, 16 were allowed and 44 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 27% over the decided record. This rate reflects outcomes on applications that reached final disposition. The examiner's work spans a single art unit within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's activity across all art units and describes the historical record without predicting outcomes on any pending or future application.
This profile reports a pooled allowance rate across all of the examiner's art units. Pooled figures combine results from different art-unit assignments and represent aggregate historical performance. An allowance rate calculated from disposed applications excludes pending matters and does not constitute a prediction for any specific case. Pooled records offer a broad view of an examiner's decided output but do not forecast individual application outcomes.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Barbara Burgess Anyan 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: 60 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