Examiner George B Davis has allowed 134 of 157 decided applications (85%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
George B Davis maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 157 disposed applications, the examiner has allowed 134 and abandoned 23, yielding an overall allowance rate of 85%. This rate reflects decided cases only and does not include pending applications. The allowance rate ranges from 63% to 96% across the art units with substantial records, indicating variation in outcomes by art unit. The pooled figure represents an aggregate measure across different subject areas within TC 2100.
A pooled record aggregates applications across multiple art units, masking variation between them. The overall allowance rate of 85% describes past decisions on 157 applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Because the examiner works in multiple art units, allowance rates can differ significantly by unit—here ranging from 63% to 96%. Aggregate figures provide historical context; they reflect correlations in the past record, not causal relationships or indicators of future results.
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 16 decided applications with an interview and 89 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 22 decided applications with an interview and 30 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner George B Davis 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: 157 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