LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/FARIBORZ KHOSHNOODI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Fariborz Khoshnoodi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 476 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION FEB 2023
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Fariborz Khoshnoodi has allowed 384 of 476 decided applications (81%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

81% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2157 · 88%AU 2164 · 73%AU 2161 · 80%AU 2162 · 100%AU 2168 · 20%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Fariborz Khoshnoodi maintains a public record spanning five art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 476 disposed applications, 384 were allowed and 92 were abandoned, resulting in an allowance rate of 81%. The examiner's allowance rates vary across the five art units, ranging from 73% to 88%. This pooled record aggregates outcomes from art units 2157, 2161, 2162, 2164, and 2168, representing the examiner's cumulative work in the technology center.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines outcomes across multiple art units into a single aggregate statistic. The overall allowance rate of 81% describes past dispositions and does not predict the outcome of any individual application. The range of 73% to 88% reflects variation among the examiner's art units but does not identify which rate applies to any specific art unit or prosecution. Pooled figures provide general context about the examiner's record across the technology center.

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 2157
206 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION181 / 25 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.2 moart unit avg 28 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.1 moart unit avg 46.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility25% · art unit 48%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)46%
§103 — Obviousness87% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness12%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW87%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW88%-1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 95 decided applications with an interview and 111 without.

ART UNIT 2164
154 APPS · 73% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

73% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION112 / 42 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.4 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.9 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 58%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)18%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness23%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW53%+37 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 82 decided applications with an interview and 72 without.

ART UNIT 2161
87 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION70 / 17 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.9 moart unit avg 23.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY52.1 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility56% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)18%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness28%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW83%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW79%+4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 40 decided applications with an interview and 47 without.

ART UNIT 2162
19 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION19 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.1 moart unit avg 23.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43.2 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility54% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)31%
§103 — Obviousness85% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 19 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2168
10 APPS · 20% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

20% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION2 / 8 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.6 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.7 moart unit avg 43.5 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Fariborz Khoshnoodi

  • What is Examiner Khoshnoodi's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 81%, based on 384 allowed applications and 92 abandoned applications out of 476 total disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Examiner Khoshnoodi maintains a record across five art units (2157, 2161, 2162, 2164, and 2168) within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates among the examiner's art units range from 73% to 88%. Individual art unit rates are shown separately in the per-art-unit section of this profile.
  • Does the pooled rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application. Actual outcomes depend on the claims, prior art, and examination record in each case.
◈ 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 Fariborz Khoshnoodi 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: 476 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