Examiner Catherine Marie Nguyen has allowed 16 of 19 decided applications (84%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Catherine Marie Nguyen maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 42 total applications, 19 have been disposed of (decided). Of those 19 decided applications, 16 were allowed and 3 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 84% over the disposed count. Her record spans a single art unit (2114). This pooled figure reflects outcomes across her caseload in TC 2100 and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application.
A pooled record aggregates decisions across all art units assigned to an examiner. The 84% allowance rate here represents historical outcomes on 19 decided applications—allowed and abandoned cases combined—and reflects past dispositions only. Aggregate figures describe an examiner's overall record and are correlational, not predictive of any specific pending or future application's outcome.
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 error detection, correction, and monitoring.
Based on 42 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Catherine Marie 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: 42 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