Examiner Brian Chew has allowed 91 of 134 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Brian Chew maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His pooled record spans one art unit and covers 134 disposed applications. Of those 134 decided cases, 91 were allowed and 43 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 68%. This rate describes the examiner's historical record across all completed applications in the technology center and does not constitute a prediction for any specific pending application.
This pooled record aggregates all disposed applications across the examiner's art units in TC 2100. The allowance rate of 68% reflects the proportion of decided cases that resulted in allowance over the examiner's public history. Pooled figures describe past performance and are correlational data only—they are not predictions of outcome for any individual application, which may present distinct claim scope, prior art, or procedural posture.
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 program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 63 decided applications with an interview and 71 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Brian Chew 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: 134 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