Examiner Enam Ahmed has allowed 666 of 810 decided applications (82%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Enam Ahmed maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 833 total applications, 810 have been disposed, of which 666 were allowed. The pooled allowance rate is 82% over the 810 decided applications. The examiner's record spans one art unit. This aggregate figure reflects historical dispositions and does not constitute a prediction for any specific pending application.
This pooled record aggregates examination activity across all art units assigned to this examiner. The allowance rate of 82% describes applications decided in the past and reflects the examiner's historical disposal pattern. Aggregate figures do not predict the outcome of any individual application, which depends on claim scope, prior art, and examination conduct specific 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 error detection, correction, and monitoring, and error-correcting coding/decoding.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 309 decided applications with an interview and 501 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Enam Ahmed 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: 833 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