Examiner James T Durkin has allowed 48 of 101 decided applications (48%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
James T Durkin's public record spans Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), covering one art unit. Across 101 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 48 and abandoned 53, resulting in an allowance rate of 48%. This pooled figure reflects decisions made across all art units in the examiner's record and describes the historical record only. The record does not constitute a prediction for any particular application.
A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, if present. The allowance rate shown here—48%—is a historical aggregate of past decisions and reflects the examiner's decided caseload without regard to subject-matter distribution or application-specific factors. Pooled figures describe what occurred in the past; they are not predictions about outcomes in individual applications.
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 →
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 33 decided applications with an interview and 68 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner James T Durkin 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: 101 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