Examiner Juan Carlos Ochoa has allowed 409 of 606 decided applications (67%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Juan Carlos Ochoa has a pooled allowance rate of 67% across 606 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His public record spans five art units: 2123, 2127, 2146, 2186, and 2187. Of 667 total applications, 409 were allowed and 197 were abandoned. The allowance rate across his art units ranges from 55% to 81%, reflecting variation in the examiner's record within TC 2100.
This pooled record aggregates results across five distinct art units within TC 2100. The 67% allowance rate describes past dispositions and does not function as a prediction for any individual application. Allowance rates vary by art unit (55% to 81%), so an applicant's experience may differ from the pooled average. The figures reflect historical outcomes only and carry no causal or predictive weight for future prosecution.
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 45 decided applications with an interview and 260 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 17 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 47 decided applications with an interview and 66 without.
Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 64 decided applications with an interview and 37 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Based on 29 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Juan Carlos Ochoa 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: 667 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