Examiner Dhruvkumar Patel has allowed 96 of 118 decided applications (81%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Dhruvkumar Patel maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), covering a single art unit. Across 143 total applications, 118 have been disposed (allowed or abandoned). Of those 118 decided applications, 96 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 81%. The record shows 22 abandoned applications. These figures reflect the examiner's pooled historical record and describe outcomes on applications already decided.
This pooled record aggregates all art units under the examiner's assignment. The 81% allowance rate is calculated from disposed applications only—allowed plus abandoned—and excludes pending cases. Aggregate figures describe the examiner's past record across multiple art units and are not predictions of outcomes for any specific application under review. Individual art-unit performance may vary.
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 electric power networks, supply, and distribution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 48 decided applications with an interview and 70 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Dhruvkumar Patel 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: 143 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