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

Examiner Gayathri Sampath

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 356 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Gayathri Sampath has allowed 281 of 356 decided applications (79%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

79% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2187 · 81%AU 2118 · 72%AU 2176 · 88%AU 2115 · 67%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Gayathri Sampath maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 356 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate stands at 79%, based on 281 allowed and 75 abandoned applications. The record spans art units 2115, 2118, 2176, and 2187. Allowance rates across these art units range from 72% to 88%, reflecting variation in outcomes by art unit. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate record and does not predict outcomes in any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's work across four art units in TC 2100. The 79% allowance rate describes past outcomes across 356 decided applications and reflects the examiner's aggregate history. Pooled figures do not constitute a prediction of any specific application's outcome, nor do they indicate how the examiner will act in future cases. Individual art unit records, where available separately, may show variation from this aggregate.

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 2187
184 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION149 / 35 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.1 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.2 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility21% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness76%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW63%+25 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 133 decided applications with an interview and 51 without.

ART UNIT 2118
118 APPS · 72% ALLOWANCE
72% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION85 / 33 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.7 moart unit avg 22.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.5 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility28% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)61%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness45%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW35%+56 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 78 decided applications with an interview and 40 without.

ART UNIT 2176
82 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION45 / 6 / 31allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.3 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.9 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility25% · art unit 41%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)91%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness76%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW75%+22 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 31 decided applications with an interview and 20 without.

ART UNIT 2115
3 APPS · 67% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.

67% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 81%
DISPOSITION2 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.3 moart unit avg 25.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.8 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness100%

Based on 3 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Gayathri Sampath

  • What is Examiner Sampath's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 79%, calculated from 281 allowed applications and 75 abandoned applications across 356 total decided applications in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The examiner's public record spans 4 art units: 2115, 2118, 2176, and 2187, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 72% to 88%. This pooled record does not attribute specific rates to individual art units; detailed breakdowns by art unit appear in separate records.
  • Does the pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The 79% figure describes the examiner's past record across decided applications and is not a prediction for any specific 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 Gayathri Sampath 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: 387 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