Examiner Eric Nilsson has allowed 476 of 563 decided applications (85%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Eric Nilsson maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 563 decided applications, his allowance rate stands at 85%. The record spans art units 2122, 2151, and 2198. Allowance rates across these art units range from 79% to 95%, reflecting variation in the composition and outcomes of applications examined within each unit. The 610 total applications include 476 allowed and 87 abandoned dispositions, with the remainder pending.
This pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units in TC 2100, combining different application populations and examination patterns. The overall allowance rate (85% across 563 decided applications) describes Nilsson's historical record and does not forecast the outcome of any specific application. Pooled figures mask variation between individual art units; separate art-unit data is available in the detailed section of this profile. Aggregate statistics are descriptive of the past, not predictive of the future.
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 neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 193 decided applications with an interview and 151 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 46 decided applications with an interview and 68 without.
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 42 decided applications with an interview and 63 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Eric Nilsson 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: 610 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