Examiner Benjamin Matthew Rohd has allowed 0 of 3 decided applications (0%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Benjamin Matthew Rohd maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning one art unit. Across 44 total applications, 3 have been disposed of (allowed or abandoned). Of those 3 decided applications, 0 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 0%. The record is limited in size; the disposed count reflects only finalized cases and excludes pending applications. This pooled figure represents outcomes across the examiner's assigned art units to date.
This record aggregates outcomes across all art units assigned to the examiner. The allowance rate is calculated from decided applications only—those allowed or abandoned—and does not include pending filings. Pooled figures describe the examiner's past record and are correlational in nature. They are not predictions about the outcome of any specific application and do not account for individual case facts, claim scope, or prosecution history.
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 artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Based on 44 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Benjamin Matthew Rohd 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: 44 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