Examiner Dustin Brian Fulford has allowed 86 of 115 decided applications (75%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Dustin Brian Fulford maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 115 disposed applications, he issued allowances in 86 cases and abandonments in 29, yielding a 75% allowance rate. His practice spans one art unit (2132). This pooled record reflects outcomes across all applications decided in that technology center; it describes past disposition and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application.
This record aggregates dispositions across a single art unit within TC 2100. Pooled allowance rates reflect historical outcomes across multiple applications and are descriptive of past record only. Aggregate figures do not predict the outcome of any specific application, which depends on claim scope, prior art, and prosecution history unique to each case.
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 input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 58 decided applications with an interview and 57 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Dustin Brian Fulford 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: 115 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