Examiner Brian S Cook has allowed 322 of 510 decided applications (63%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Brian S Cook has a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 510 disposed applications, the pooled allowance rate is 63%, with 322 allowed and 188 abandoned. The allowance rate varies across his art units, ranging from 47% to 74%. This range reflects differences in the composition and outcomes of applications examined within each art unit. The data presented here is an aggregate of his entire record across TC 2100 and does not predict outcomes for any individual application.
A pooled record aggregates data from multiple art units, masking unit-level variation. The 63% allowance rate describes historical outcomes across all applications Cook examined in TC 2100, not a prediction for any new filing. The range (47% to 74%) illustrates that outcomes differ among his art units. Pooled figures are useful for understanding overall patterns but do not forecast specific application results. Detailed per-art-unit records are available separately for more granular analysis.
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 neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 85 decided applications with an interview and 70 without.
Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 62 decided applications with an interview and 82 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 79 decided applications with an interview and 56 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 42 decided applications with an interview and 34 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Brian S Cook 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: 556 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