LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Duc T Doan

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 722 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2018
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Duc T Doan has allowed 593 of 722 decided applications (82%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

82% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2185 · 83%AU 2135 · 83%AU 2188 · 80%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Duc T Doan has a public record of 722 disposed applications across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of these decided applications, 593 were allowed and 129 abandoned, yielding an overall allowance rate of 82%. The allowance rate across the examiner's art units ranges from 80% to 83%. This pooled figure represents the aggregate outcome of applications decided in art units 2135, 2185, and 2188 and does not represent a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates dispositions across multiple art units, each handling distinct subject matter within TC 2100. The overall allowance rate—here, 82%—is a historical summary of all decided applications and reflects past outcomes only. The range (80% to 83%) shows variation among individual art units but does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Pooled statistics describe what occurred; they are not forecasts.

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 2185
320 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE
83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION265 / 55 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.8 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.5 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility27% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)16%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness57%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW78%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW84%-6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 50 decided applications with an interview and 270 without.

ART UNIT 2135
217 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION180 / 37 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.5 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.1 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility14% · art unit 21%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness78% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness72%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW82%+3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 52 decided applications with an interview and 165 without.

ART UNIT 2188
185 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION148 / 37 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24 moart unit avg 26.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.8 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW78%+13 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 32 decided applications with an interview and 153 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Duc T Doan

  • What is Examiner Duc T Doan's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 82%, based on 593 allowed applications and 129 abandoned applications out of 722 total disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner has a record spanning 3 art units (2135, 2185, and 2188) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 80% to 83% across the examiner's art units. This pooled figure is an aggregate; individual art-unit rates are reported separately.
  • Does this record predict my application's outcome?
    No. Historical allowance rates describe past decisions and are not forecasts for any specific application.
◈ 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 Duc T Doan 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: 722 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