Examiner Josep Han has allowed 6 of 15 decided applications (40%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Josep Han maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 57 total applications, 15 have been disposed (allowed or abandoned). Of those 15 decided applications, 6 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 40%. The examiner works within a single art unit (2122). This pooled record reflects outcomes across all applications within that art unit and does not forecast results in any specific case.
This pooled record aggregates all applications decided within the examiner's assigned art unit. The allowance rate (40% of 15 decided applications) describes past outcomes and reflects the examiner's historical record. Pooled figures do not vary by individual application characteristics and are not predictions of how any future application will be examined or decided. An aggregate rate describes the past, not the future.
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.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Josep Han 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: 57 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