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

Examiner Hassan Mahmoudi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 233 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 Hassan Mahmoudi has allowed 155 of 233 decided applications (67%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

67% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2165 · 71%AU 2163 · 57%AU 2169 · 0%AU 2175 · 75%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Patent Examiner Hassan Mahmoudi maintains a public record across four art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 233 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 67%. Of 236 total applications in the record, 155 were allowed and 78 were abandoned. The allowance rate ranges from 57% to 71% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in the disposed application records within individual units. This pooled figure represents the examiner's overall historical record across these areas of TC 2100.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates application decisions across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 67% allowance rate describes the examiner's past disposition of decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application outcome. The range of 57% to 71% across individual art units indicates that results vary by art unit; this aggregate figure combines those different records. Past allowance rates do not determine the fate of any future application.

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 2165
179 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION127 / 52 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.6 moart unit avg 22.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.5 moart unit avg 39.6 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW62%+29 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 55 decided applications with an interview and 124 without.

ART UNIT 2163
47 APPS · 57% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

57% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION25 / 19 / 3allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.5 moart unit avg 23.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39 moart unit avg 40.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility66% · art unit 51%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness82% · art unit 78%
§112 — Written description & definiteness43%

Based on 47 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2169
6 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION0 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.2 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.5 moart unit avg 40 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility75% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%

Based on 6 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2175
4 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION3 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.5 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.7 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Hassan Mahmoudi

  • What is Hassan Mahmoudi's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 67% over 233 decided applications pooled across all art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The examiner's record spans four art units within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 57% to 71% across the examiner's art units, indicating that results differ by individual art unit.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    This record describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application outcome. Allowance depends on the application's merits, art unit assignment, and prosecution history.
◈ 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 Hassan Mahmoudi 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: 236 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