LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/CAO H NGUYEN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Cao H Nguyen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 1,475 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Cao H Nguyen has allowed 1,334 of 1,475 decided applications (90%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

90% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2171 · 92%AU 2173 · 87%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Cao H Nguyen maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning 2 art units: 2171 and 2173. Across 1,475 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 1,334, yielding an allowance rate of 90%. The allowance rate ranges from 87% to 92% across these art units. Of the examiner's 1,505 total applications on file, 141 were abandoned. This pooled record aggregates the examiner's work across both art units and reflects decided cases only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates Examiner Nguyen's work across multiple art units in TC 2100. The figures describe past dispositions and are not predictions about any specific application. An aggregate allowance rate across art units masks variation; applicants may wish to review the examiner's separate per-art-unit records to understand patterns within individual art units. Pooled statistics are correlational summaries, not causal indicators of how any particular application will be handled.

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 2171
1,040 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE
92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION928 / 82 / 30allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.4 moart unit avg 22 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.7 moart unit avg 37.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility22% · art unit 38%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)51%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness14%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW91%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 217 decided applications with an interview and 793 without.

ART UNIT 2173
465 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE
87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION406 / 59 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION32.1 moart unit avg 25.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.6 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility14% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)36%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness7%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW87%+13 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 16 decided applications with an interview and 449 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Cao H Nguyen

  • What is Examiner Cao H Nguyen's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 90% across 1,475 disposed applications in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 2 art units (2171 and 2173) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 87% to 92% across the examiner's art units. Separate per-art-unit records provide detail on each.
  • What does this pooled record tell me about my specific application?
    This pooled record is a factual summary of past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. It aggregates work across multiple art units and describes correlations, not causation.
◈ 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 Cao H Nguyen 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: 1,505 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