Examiner Hashem Farrokh has allowed 1,134 of 1,257 decided applications (90%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Hashem Farrokh maintains a public record of 1,287 applications across 5 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 1,257 disposed applications, 1,134 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 90%. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 88% to 93% across these art units. This pooled figure represents the aggregate record and does not isolate performance within any single art unit.
This profile aggregates Examiner Farrokh's decisions across multiple art units within TC 2100. The allowance rate and other aggregate figures describe the examiner's historical record and reflect past outcomes on decided applications. Such pooled statistics do not constitute a prediction of the outcome of any specific application, nor do they account for variation among individual art units or case-specific circumstances.
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 input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 102 decided applications with an interview and 229 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 31 decided applications with an interview and 287 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 39 decided applications with an interview and 194 without.
Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 72 decided applications with an interview and 154 without.
Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 40 decided applications with an interview and 109 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Hashem Farrokh 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: 1,287 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