Examiner Kavita Stanley has allowed 74 of 208 decided applications (36%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Kavita Stanley holds a public record across 4 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 208 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 36%, computed from 74 allowed applications against 134 abandoned ones. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 33% to 80%, reflecting variation in the composition and outcomes of applications within each unit. This pooled figure aggregates different subject areas and does not represent performance on any single art unit or application type.
This pooled record aggregates allowance data across multiple art units within TC 2100. The overall allowance rate describes the examiner's historical disposition of decided cases and does not constitute a prediction for any pending or future application. Variation across individual art units—shown in the range from 33% to 80%—reflects differences in application volume, subject matter within each unit, and other contextual factors. Pooled statistics describe past outcomes; they do not forecast results on specific filings.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 44 decided applications with an interview and 86 without.
Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 25 decided applications with an interview and 29 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Based on 40 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Based on 14 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kavita Stanley 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: 238 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