Examiner Kenneth Tang has allowed 819 of 935 decided applications (88%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Kenneth Tang maintains a public record across 5 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 935 disposed applications, he allowed 819, producing an 88% allowance rate. The allowance rate ranges from 75% to 96% across his art units, reflecting variation in the composition and outcomes of applications examined within each unit. This pooled figure represents applications decided—allowed or abandoned—and excludes pending matters.
A pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units, masking unit-specific variation. The overall allowance rate and range describe the examiner's historical record and do not predict outcomes in any individual application. Art-unit-specific rates appear in separate sections and may differ materially from the pooled figure. Aggregated statistics reflect past decisions and are correlational, not causal.
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 software engineering, 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 246 decided applications with an interview and 228 without.
Primarily examines program control and execution, and software engineering.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 90 decided applications with an interview and 92 without.
Primarily examines 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 118 decided applications with an interview and 88 without.
Primarily examines 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 36 decided applications with an interview and 34 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kenneth Tang 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: 960 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