LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/CALVIN M BRIEN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Calvin M Brien

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 69 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAY 2017
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Calvin M Brien has allowed 45 of 69 decided applications (65%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

65% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2183 · 52%AU 2182 · 65%AU 2193 · 94%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Calvin M Brien maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 69 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate stands at 65%, computed from 45 allowed and 24 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 52% to 65% across the art units in which the examiner has worked. This pooled figure represents aggregated outcomes across multiple art units and reflects historical dispositions only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates allowance rates across multiple art units, masking variation between them. The overall 65% figure describes past outcomes across all three art units combined and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Rates vary by art unit; the range shown (52% to 65%) reflects this natural variation. Pooled statistics describe historical record, not the likelihood of allowance in any individual case.

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 2183
33 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines program control and execution.

52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION17 / 16 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.4 moart unit avg 25 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.9 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility77% · art unit 34%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)63%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness83%

Based on 33 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2182
20 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines data-processing methods for specific functions, and processing data by its order or content.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION13 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.9 moart unit avg 24.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.1 moart unit avg 37.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility28% · art unit 31%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 76%
§112 — Written description & definiteness94%

Based on 20 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2193
16 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines software engineering, and error detection, correction, and monitoring.

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 70%
DISPOSITION15 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.9 moart unit avg 30.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.8 moart unit avg 44 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility47% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)47%
§103 — Obviousness87% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness80%

Based on 16 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Calvin M Brien

  • What is Calvin M Brien's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 65% across 69 disposed applications (45 allowed, 24 abandoned), pooled across all three art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Calvin M Brien has a public record spanning three art units (2182, 2183, 2193) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 52% to 65% across the art units in which the examiner has worked, reflecting variation among them.
  • What does this pooled record tell me about my application?
    The pooled figures describe the examiner's historical record and are not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Actual results depend on claim scope, prior art, and examiner assignment.
◈ 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 Calvin M Brien 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: 69 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