Examiner Kakali Chaki has allowed 16 of 70 decided applications (23%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Kakali Chaki maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 103 total applications, 70 have been disposed of (decided). Of those 70 disposed applications, 16 were allowed and 54 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 23% across the examiner's pooled record. This allowance rate reflects decisions made to date and describes the examiner's historical record in the technology center.
This pooled record aggregates Examiner Chaki's work across three separate art units. The 23% allowance rate is calculated from all decided applications across those units combined and represents the examiner's historical record. Aggregate figures describe what has occurred in the past; they are not predictions about the outcome of any specific pending or future application. Individual art units may show different patterns.
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.
Primarily examines software engineering, and error detection, correction, and monitoring.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kakali Chaki 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: 103 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