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

Examiner Ece Hur

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 207 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION DEC 2015
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Ece Hur has allowed 70 of 207 decided applications (34%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

34% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2172 · 39%AU 2175 · 23%AU 2179 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Ece Hur maintains a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 207 disposed applications, the examiner issued allowances on 70 cases, yielding an allowance rate of 34 percent. Among the art units with substantial records, allowance rates range from 23 percent to 39 percent, reflecting variation in outcomes across the examiner's subject-matter areas. The pooled figure represents the aggregate of all decided applications and does not account for pending or abandoned cases separately.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units within TC 2100, combining different technical areas into a single statistic. The pooled allowance rate (34 percent) describes past dispositions and reflects the examiner's overall record across all units examined. Aggregate figures do not predict outcomes in any individual application and are not causal—they reflect historical data only. Variation across art units is normal and documented separately.

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 2172
145 APPS · 39% ALLOWANCE
39% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION57 / 88 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.7 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY61.2 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility43% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)39%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness22%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW57%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW24%+33 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 69 decided applications with an interview and 76 without.

ART UNIT 2175
56 APPS · 23% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

23% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION13 / 43 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.5 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.7 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility100% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)0%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW73%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW5%+68 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 15 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.

ART UNIT 2179
6 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION0 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.5 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.2 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ece Hur

  • What is Ece Hur's allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 34 percent over 207 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). This is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Ece Hur's public record spans three art units (2172, 2175, 2179) within TC 2100. The figures shown are pooled across all three.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across art units?
    Allowance rates range from 23 percent to 39 percent across the examiner's art units with substantial records. This range reflects variation in outcomes by technical area and is a factual description, not a prediction.
  • What does the pooled record mean?
    The pooled record combines all outcomes from all art units into one aggregate figure. It describes the examiner's historical performance across TC 2100 as a whole and does not identify outcomes by individual art unit.
◈ 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 Ece Hur 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: 207 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