LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/BRIAN R PEUGH
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Brian R Peugh

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 1,309 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Brian R Peugh has allowed 1,222 of 1,309 decided applications (93%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

93% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2187 · 90%AU 2133 · 98%AU 2137 · 95%AU 2186 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Brian R Peugh maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning four art units. His pooled allowance rate is 93% across 1,309 disposed applications, of which 1,222 were allowed and 87 abandoned. The allowance rate ranges from 90% to 98% across his art units. This aggregate figure describes the historical record across all examined art units combined and does not constitute a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates disposal statistics across multiple art units, combining applications from different subject areas within TC 2100. The allowance rate reflects the proportion of decided cases (allowed plus abandoned) and is calculated from disposed applications only, excluding pending filings. Aggregate figures describe past outcomes and are correlational, not predictive of any individual application's result.

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 2187
567 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

90% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION508 / 59 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.5 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.4 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility13% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness31% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW93%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 46 decided applications with an interview and 521 without.

ART UNIT 2133
390 APPS · 98% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

98% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION352 / 9 / 29allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY21.1 moart unit avg 34.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility22% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)62%
§103 — Obviousness38% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness39%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW97%+1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 58 decided applications with an interview and 303 without.

ART UNIT 2137
376 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 68%
DISPOSITION357 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.2 moart unit avg 25.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.6 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility18% · art unit 25%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)62%
§103 — Obviousness31% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness46%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW96%-8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 50 decided applications with an interview and 326 without.

ART UNIT 2186
5 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION5 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION8.4 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY17.1 moart unit avg 35 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Brian R Peugh

  • What is Brian R Peugh's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 93%, calculated from 1,309 disposed applications across all four art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Four art units: 2133, 2137, 2186, and 2187, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 90% to 98% across the examiner's art units with a substantial record.
  • Does this record predict the outcome of my application?
    No. Historical aggregate figures describe past dispositions and are not predictions of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Brian R Peugh 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: 1,338 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