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

Examiner Bing Zhao

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 554 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Bing Zhao has allowed 506 of 554 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

91% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2195 · 90%AU 2151 · 94%AU 2198 · 93%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Bing Zhao maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 554 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 91%. This rate reflects 506 allowed applications against 48 abandoned applications in the pooled record. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 90% to 94%, reflecting variation in the composition and outcomes of work across different art-unit assignments within TC 2100.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled, cross-art-unit record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units with different subject-matter scopes and application characteristics. The overall allowance rate describes the historical record across all of the examiner's assigned art units combined. This aggregate figure is a description of past dispositions and is not a prediction about any specific application. Individual art-unit records may differ from the pooled rate.

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 2195
333 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution.

90% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION299 / 34 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.5 moart unit avg 33.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.1 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility39% · art unit 49%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)34%
§103 — Obviousness98% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness88%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW96%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW73%+23 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 248 decided applications with an interview and 85 without.

ART UNIT 2151
144 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION108 / 7 / 29allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.3 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.9 moart unit avg 44.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility53% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)42%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness97%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW86%+11 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 78 decided applications with an interview and 37 without.

ART UNIT 2198
106 APPS · 93% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution.

93% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 83%
DISPOSITION99 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.2 moart unit avg 25.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY32.5 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility25% · art unit 50%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)19%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness98%
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Bing Zhao

  • What is Examiner Bing Zhao's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 91%, calculated over 554 decided applications pooled across all assigned art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Examiner Bing Zhao has a public record across 3 art units (2151, 2195, 2198) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 90% to 94%. Individual art-unit records may differ from the pooled 91% figure.
  • What does this record mean for my application?
    This pooled record describes the examiner's historical outcomes and is not a prediction of the outcome for any specific application. Prosecution outcomes depend on application-specific factors, claim scope, prior art, and evidence submitted.
◈ 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 Bing Zhao 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: 583 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