LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/HUBERT G CHEUNG
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Hubert G Cheung

TECH CENTER 2100 · 6 ART UNITS · 413 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 6 ART UNITS

Examiner Hubert G Cheung has allowed 260 of 413 decided applications (63%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

63% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2157 · 66%AU 2152 · 59%AU 2161 · 100%AU 2159 · 50%AU 2169 · 42%AU 2168 · 33%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Hubert G Cheung holds a public record of 451 total applications across 6 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 413 disposed applications, 260 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 63%. The examiner's allowance rates across individual art units range from 50% to 100%, reflecting variation in outcomes by art unit. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate record and does not predict outcomes in any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's outcomes across multiple art units in TC 2100. The 63% allowance rate describes past decisions on 413 disposed applications and reflects the examiner's overall record to date. Pooled figures do not isolate performance by subject matter or art unit, nor do they constitute predictions about future applications. The range across art units shows variability that the detailed art-unit breakdown addresses separately.

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 2157
211 APPS · 66% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

66% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION139 / 72 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.9 moart unit avg 28 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54.3 moart unit avg 46.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 48%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)80%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness62%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW82%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW38%+44 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 133 decided applications with an interview and 78 without.

ART UNIT 2152
116 APPS · 59% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

59% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION68 / 48 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.6 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.1 moart unit avg 42.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility43% · art unit 62%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)94%
§103 — Obviousness98% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness53%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW40%+27 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 81 decided applications with an interview and 35 without.

ART UNIT 2161
62 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION24 / 0 / 38allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.5 moart unit avg 23.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.6 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness98% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness66%
ART UNIT 2159
44 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION22 / 22 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.5 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY56 moart unit avg 45.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility100% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness0% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness100%

Based on 44 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2169
12 APPS · 42% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

42% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION5 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.7 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.5 moart unit avg 40 mo
ART UNIT 2168
6 APPS · 33% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

33% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION2 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.8 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY66 moart unit avg 43.5 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Hubert G Cheung

  • What is Examiner Cheung's overall allowance rate?
    Across 413 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 63%. This reflects the share of decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) in the examiner's pooled record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Examiner Cheung has a record spanning 6 art units within TC 2100: 2152, 2157, 2159, 2161, 2168, and 2169.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the art units?
    Allowance rates range from 50% to 100% across the examiner's art units. This range reflects variation in outcomes by individual art unit.
  • Does the 63% rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes past decisions and is not a prediction of any specific application. Outcomes vary by art unit, application facts, 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 Hubert G Cheung 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: 451 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