Examiner David M Nafziger has allowed 38 of 61 decided applications (62%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
David M Nafziger maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 61 disposed applications in art unit 2169, the examiner allowed 38 and abandoned 23, yielding an allowance rate of 62% over the decided count. This rate reflects the examiner's historical record on applications that reached final disposition. The record spans a single art unit within TC 2100.
This pooled record aggregates all applications decided by the examiner across their assigned art units. The allowance rate of 62% describes what occurred historically over 61 closed applications and is correlational data—a summary of past dispositions. Aggregate figures describe the examiner's record and are not predictions about the outcome of any specific application. Individual art-unit records, where available separately, may show variation.
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 33 decided applications with an interview and 28 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner David M Nafziger 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: 61 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