Examiner Chaitanya R Jayakumar has allowed 13 of 54 decided applications (24%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Chaitanya R Jayakumar maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning two art units. Across 54 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 13, for an allowance rate of 24%. Of 76 total applications in the record, 41 were abandoned. The pooled allowance rate reflects decisions made across both art units and describes the historical record; it is not a prediction for any specific application.
This examiner's record is pooled across two art units within TC 2100, meaning the allowance rate aggregates decisions from different subject areas. The 24% figure represents past dispositions on decided applications and reflects the examiner's combined practice across both units. Aggregate statistics describe historical patterns and do not forecast outcomes on individual cases or predict how any particular application will be examined.
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 machine learning, and neural-network / biological-model computing.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Based on 2 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Chaitanya R Jayakumar 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: 76 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