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

Examiner Daniel H Um

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 124 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2015
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Daniel H Um has allowed 38 of 124 decided applications (31%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

31% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2142 · 19%AU 2175 · 43%AU 2176 · 50%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Daniel H Um has disposed of 124 applications across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those decided applications, 38 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 31%. The examiner's record spans multiple art units (2142, 2175, 2176), and allowance rates across these units range from 19% to 43%. This range reflects variation in the examiner's record within TC 2100, though the pooled figure of 31% represents the aggregate outcome across all decided cases in the examiner's public record.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across three separate art units. The overall allowance rate of 31% describes the examiner's past dispositions across all units combined and is not a prediction for any specific application. Individual art units may exhibit different allowance rates; the stated range (19% to 43%) shows this variation. Pooled figures describe historical performance and help contextualize an examiner's record across their assigned subject matter, but they do not forecast outcomes in particular cases.

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 2142
67 APPS · 19% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

19% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION13 / 54 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.1 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY68.2 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)61%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness51%
ART UNIT 2175
53 APPS · 43% ALLOWANCE

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

43% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION23 / 30 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION33.4 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53.4 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)80%
§103 — Obviousness60% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW28%+39 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 21 decided applications with an interview and 32 without.

ART UNIT 2176
4 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION2 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.7 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.9 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Daniel H Um

  • What is Daniel H Um's overall allowance rate?
    The overall allowance rate is 31%, based on 38 allowed applications among 124 total disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Daniel H Um has a public record across 3 art units (2142, 2175, 2176) in 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 19% to 43%, reflecting variation in outcomes within the technology center.
  • Does this pooled allowance rate apply to my application?
    No. The pooled figure describes past dispositions and is not a prediction for any specific application. Outcomes depend on numerous case-specific factors.
◈ 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 Daniel H Um 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: 124 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