Examiner Chuen-Meei Gan has allowed 430 of 494 decided applications (87%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Chuen-Meei Gan maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 494 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 87%. This figure reflects 430 allowed applications and 64 abandoned applications. The examiner's record spans multiple areas within TC 2100, with allowance rates ranging from 25% to 95% across these art units. The pooled allowance rate describes the examiner's historical performance on decided cases and does not characterize any specific application or pending matter.
This profile aggregates the examiner's record across four art units in TC 2100. The 87% allowance rate is a pooled figure—a historical average of all decided applications across these different art units combined. Pooled rates do not predict outcomes on individual applications, nor do they isolate performance within any single art unit. The range (25% to 95%) shows variation across the four units but does not identify which unit carries which rate. Pooled data is historical context only.
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 181 decided applications with an interview and 40 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 104 decided applications with an interview and 25 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 100 decided applications with an interview and 24 without.
Primarily examines machine learning, and neural-network / biological-model computing.
Based on 20 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Chuen-Meei Gan 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: 523 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