Examiner Eunhee Kim has allowed 640 of 842 decided applications (76%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Eunhee Kim maintains a public record across 5 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 842 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 76%. This rate reflects 640 allowed applications and 202 abandonments. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 65% to 84%. The examiner's record spans art units 2123, 2127, 2146, 2147, and 2188. These figures represent the pooled, historical record and do not constitute predictions for any pending or future application.
This profile aggregates Examiner Kim's record across multiple art units within TC 2100. The pooled allowance rate—76% over 842 decided cases—describes what has occurred, not what will occur in any particular application. Because the record combines different art units, the aggregate figure masks variation; the range (65% to 84%) shows that allowance rates differ by art unit. Pooled data is useful context for understanding an examiner's overall patterns, but it is not predictive of individual case outcomes.
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 135 decided applications with an interview and 326 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 59 decided applications with an interview and 42 without.
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 76 decided applications with an interview and 72 without.
Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 68 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.
Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Based on 23 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Eunhee Kim 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: 898 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