LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/HUNG Q PHAM
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Hung Q Pham

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 845 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAR 2023
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Hung Q Pham has allowed 679 of 845 decided applications (80%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

80% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2159 · 84%AU 2168 · 63%AU 2169 · 69%AU 2162 · 64%AU 2172 · 40%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Hung Q Pham holds a public record across 5 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 845 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 679, for an overall allowance rate of 80%. This rate reflects decided cases only (allowed and abandoned combined); pending applications are excluded. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 63% to 84%. This range reflects the different subject-matter distributions and application volumes within each art unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates results across multiple art units in TC 2100. The 80% allowance rate describes past dispositions across all five art units combined and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application. Different art units within the technology center show different allowance rates (63% to 84%), meaning outcomes may vary by the specific art-unit classification of a given application. Pooled statistics describe historical patterns only.

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 2159
715 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION599 / 116 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.3 moart unit avg 45.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility46% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)85%
§103 — Obviousness79% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness84%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW68%+26 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 437 decided applications with an interview and 278 without.

ART UNIT 2168
96 APPS · 63% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

63% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION60 / 36 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.3 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY51.5 moart unit avg 43.5 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW14%+76 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 61 decided applications with an interview and 35 without.

ART UNIT 2169
13 APPS · 69% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

69% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION9 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.4 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY55.7 moart unit avg 40 mo
ART UNIT 2162
11 APPS · 64% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

64% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION7 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.8 moart unit avg 23.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.4 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
ART UNIT 2172
10 APPS · 40% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
40% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION4 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.9 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.9 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Hung Q Pham

  • What is Examiner Hung Q Pham's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 80%, based on 845 disposed applications (679 allowed, 166 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner handle?
    The examiner has a public record across 5 art units: 2159, 2162, 2168, 2169, and 2172.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 63% to 84% across the examiner's art units, reflecting differences in subject matter and application volume within TC 2100.
  • Is the 80% rate a prediction for my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes historical dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Hung Q Pham 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: 845 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