Examiner Kevin D Dothager has allowed 14 of 21 decided applications (67%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Kevin D Dothager maintains a public record across one art unit in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 21 disposed applications, the examiner issued allowances in 14 cases, yielding an allowance rate of 67%. Seven applications were abandoned. This pooled figure reflects the examiner's overall record across all assigned art units and describes decisions already rendered, not a prediction of any specific application.
A pooled record aggregates data across all art units assigned to an examiner. The allowance rate shown here is a historical summary of applications already decided. It describes the examiner's past output, not a forecast for any individual case. Different art units within TC 2100 may carry different application volumes and outcomes; pooled figures represent the combined result and are not applicable to any single art unit in isolation.
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 error detection, correction, and monitoring.
Based on 21 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kevin D Dothager 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: 21 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