LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/HONG CHONG KIM
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Hong Chong Kim

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 841 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION FEB 2022
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Hong Chong Kim has allowed 739 of 841 decided applications (88%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

88% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2138 · 90%AU 2185 · 80%AU 2188 · 89%AU 2186 · 95%AU 2187 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Hong Chong Kim maintains a pooled allowance rate of 88% across 841 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The examiner's record spans five art units: 2138, 2185, 2186, 2187, and 2188. Of the 841 decided applications, 739 were allowed and 102 were abandoned. The allowance rate ranges from 80% to 95% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes within the examiner's portfolio. These figures describe the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates results across multiple art units within TC 2100, providing a broad view of the examiner's past performance. The overall allowance rate (88% across 841 decided applications) and the range across individual art units (80% to 95%) describe what has occurred, not what will occur in any future application. Aggregate statistics do not predict the outcome of any specific case. Detailed per-art-unit records appear in separate sections.

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 2138
347 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

90% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION314 / 33 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.3 moart unit avg 19.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.5 moart unit avg 32.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)71%
§103 — Obviousness73% · art unit 71%
§112 — Written description & definiteness32%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 133 decided applications with an interview and 214 without.

ART UNIT 2185
238 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE
80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION190 / 48 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.1 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.4 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)17%
§103 — Obviousness33% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW76%+18 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 49 decided applications with an interview and 189 without.

ART UNIT 2188
135 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION120 / 15 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.6 moart unit avg 26.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility22% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)49%
§103 — Obviousness76% · art unit 74%
§112 — Written description & definiteness45%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 21 decided applications with an interview and 114 without.

ART UNIT 2186
113 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION107 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.4 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.8 moart unit avg 35 mo
ART UNIT 2187
8 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION8 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION13.2 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY17.7 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Hong Chong Kim

  • What is Hong Chong Kim's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's overall allowance rate is 88%, based on 841 disposed applications (739 allowed, 102 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner has a substantial record across five art units: 2138, 2185, 2186, 2187, and 2188, all within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 80% to 95% across these art units. This range reflects variation in outcomes; the pooled rate of 88% aggregates all five units.
  • Does this record predict the outcome of my application?
    No. Historical allowance rates describe past decisions and are not predictions of any specific application. Each application is examined independently.
◈ 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 Hong Chong Kim 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: 841 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