Examiner Brendan S Lillis has allowed 30 of 43 decided applications (70%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Brendan S Lillis maintains a public record of 43 disposed applications across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those 43 decided applications, 30 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 70%. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 68% to 71% across the art units in his record. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across multiple art units and reflects historical disposition data only.
This record pools applications across 2 separate art units. The 70% allowance rate describes past decisions on 43 disposed applications and does not forecast the outcome of any specific application. Allowance rates vary across art units; the range from 68% to 71% reflects differences in how individual art units were decided. Pooled statistics describe aggregate history, not individual cases.
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 computer-aided design (CAD).
Based on 22 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Based on 21 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Brendan S Lillis 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: 43 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