Examiner Dara J Glasser has allowed 99 of 167 decided applications (59%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Dara J Glasser maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 180 total applications, 167 have been disposed. Of those 167 decided applications, 99 were allowed and 68 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 59%. The examiner's record spans a single art unit. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate allowance rate across all decided cases in that art unit and reflects the historical record only.
This pooled record aggregates all applications and decisions across the examiner's art unit assignment within TC 2100. The allowance rate is computed from disposed (decided) applications only—pending cases are excluded. Aggregate historical figures describe what has occurred and do not constitute a prediction of how any specific future application will be examined or decided.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 117 decided applications with an interview and 50 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Dara J Glasser 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: 180 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