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

Examiner Hicham Skhoun

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 436 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Hicham Skhoun has allowed 357 of 436 decided applications (82%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

82% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2169 · 86%AU 2155 · 65%AU 2164 · 91%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Hicham Skhoun's public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spans three art units and covers 476 total applications. Of 436 disposed applications, 357 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 82%. The allowance rate ranges from 65% to 91% across the examiner's art units. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across multiple art units and represents the historical record of decided cases, excluding pending applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines data from multiple art units into a single aggregate figure. The overall allowance rate of 82% describes past decisions across all three art units combined and is historical in nature. The range (65% to 91%) reflects variation among individual art units but does not identify which art unit produced which rate. Aggregate statistics describe the examiner's record and are not predictions for any particular application or art unit.

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 2169
289 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION248 / 41 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.9 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.5 moart unit avg 40 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility42% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)96%
§103 — Obviousness78% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness41%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW84%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW88%-4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 136 decided applications with an interview and 153 without.

ART UNIT 2155
94 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION61 / 33 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21 moart unit avg 27.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.6 moart unit avg 42.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW73%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW48%+25 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 63 decided applications with an interview and 31 without.

ART UNIT 2164
93 APPS · 91% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

91% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION48 / 5 / 40allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.4 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.6 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility52% · art unit 58%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)97%
§103 — Obviousness84% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness41%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW93%-5 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 25 decided applications with an interview and 28 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Hicham Skhoun

  • What is Hicham Skhoun's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 82%, based on 357 allowed applications out of 436 disposed (decided) applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The record spans three art units within TC 2100: art units 2155, 2164, and 2169.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 65% to 91% across the examiner's art units. The pooled 82% figure aggregates all three.
  • What does this pooled record represent?
    The pooled record is a historical summary of decisions across all art units combined. It is not a prediction for any specific application and does not identify which outcomes occurred in which art unit.
◈ 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 Hicham Skhoun 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