Examiner Eric Coleman has allowed 1,362 of 1,459 decided applications (93%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Eric Coleman's public record covers 1,459 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), spanning one art unit. Of those decided applications, 1,362 were allowed and 97 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 93%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across all assigned art units and reflects historical outcomes on applications that have reached final disposition. The record does not include pending applications.
This pooled record aggregates dispositions across all art units assigned to the examiner. The allowance rate describes past outcomes on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's fate. Pooled figures mask variation among individual art units and reflect historical performance only. To understand performance within a particular art unit, consult that unit's separate detailed record.
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 program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 347 decided applications with an interview and 1,112 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Eric Coleman 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: 1,459 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