LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/DAEHO D SONG
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Daeho D Song

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 471 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION SEP 2022
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Daeho D Song has allowed 285 of 471 decided applications (61%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

61% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2141 · 59%AU 2177 · 87%AU 2175 · 36%AU 2176 · 36%AU 2172 · 44%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Daeho D Song maintains a public record across five art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 471 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 285 and abandoned 186, yielding an overall allowance rate of 61%. Across the examiner's art units—2141, 2172, 2175, 2176, and 2177—allowance rates range from 36% to 87%. This span reflects variation in outcomes across the different areas of TC 2100 in which the examiner has worked. The pooled figure of 61% represents the aggregate record and does not predict the outcome of any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's record across multiple art units within TC 2100. Pooled figures describe past disposition history and the breadth of the examiner's practice. The 61% allowance rate reflects 285 allowed decisions among 471 total decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The range of 36% to 87% across art units shows variation but does not identify which rate applies to any particular submission or art unit.

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 2141
289 APPS · 59% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

59% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION171 / 118 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.4 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53.6 moart unit avg 47.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility60% · art unit 49%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)81%
§103 — Obviousness85% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness39%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW76%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW31%+45 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 180 decided applications with an interview and 109 without.

ART UNIT 2177
92 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE
87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION80 / 12 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.1 moart unit avg 22.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.6 moart unit avg 40.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility38% · art unit 40%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)96%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness41%
ART UNIT 2175
36 APPS · 36% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

36% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION13 / 23 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.8 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY51.3 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
ART UNIT 2176
36 APPS · 36% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

36% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION13 / 23 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.1 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.9 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
ART UNIT 2172
18 APPS · 44% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
44% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION8 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.8 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.5 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility67% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 18 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Daeho D Song

  • What is Examiner Daeho D Song's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 61%, based on 285 allowed applications among 471 total disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner has a record across five art units: 2141, 2172, 2175, 2176, and 2177, all within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 36% to 87%. This range reflects variation in outcomes across different areas within TC 2100.
  • Does the 61% rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The 61% figure is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Daeho D Song 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: 471 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