LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/HWEI-MIN LU
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Hwei-Min Lu

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 237 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Hwei-Min Lu has allowed 152 of 237 decided applications (64%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

64% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2175 · 51%AU 2142 · 84%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Hwei-Min Lu maintains a public record across 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 237 disposed applications, 152 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 64%. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 51% to 84%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units and reflects historical outcomes on decided applications only; pending applications are excluded from the calculation.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled examiner record aggregates allowance data across multiple art units and represents a historical snapshot, not a forecast for any individual application. The overall rate combines different art-unit records into a single figure. Allowance rates are computed from decided (allowed and abandoned) applications only. The range across art units indicates variation in outcomes by subject matter within TC 2100, but the pooled rate does not predict results in any specific case 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 2175
144 APPS · 51% ALLOWANCE

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

51% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION74 / 70 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION13.5 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)99%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness87%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW19%+48 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 97 decided applications with an interview and 47 without.

ART UNIT 2142
139 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION78 / 15 / 46allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.7 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.6 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)97%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness87%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW65%+30 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 59 decided applications with an interview and 34 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Hwei-Min Lu

  • What is Examiner Hwei-Min Lu's overall allowance rate?
    The overall allowance rate is 64%, based on 152 allowed applications out of 237 disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Examiner Lu maintains a record across 2 art units (2142 and 2175) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 51% to 84% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by subject matter within the technology center.
  • Is the pooled allowance rate a prediction for my application?
    No. The pooled rate is a historical summary of decided applications 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 Hwei-Min Lu 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: 283 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