Examiner Kibrom K Gebresilassie has allowed 583 of 812 decided applications (72%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Kibrom K Gebresilassie maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 812 disposed applications, the examiner's pooled allowance rate is 72%. The allowance rate ranges from 56% to 87% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by subject matter and art unit. This pooled figure represents applications that have been allowed or abandoned; 583 applications were allowed and 229 abandoned. The record spans a substantial base of 855 total applications.
This pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 72% overall allowance rate describes past outcomes across all applications the examiner has decided, and does not constitute a prediction of the outcome of any specific application. The range from 56% to 87% indicates that allowance rates vary by art unit; the aggregate figure masks this variation. Pooled statistics describe historical performance, not individual case prospects.
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 machine learning, and neural-network / biological-model computing.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 117 decided applications with an interview and 241 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 67 decided applications with an interview and 81 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 66 decided applications with an interview and 90 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 69 decided applications with an interview and 81 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kibrom K Gebresilassie 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: 855 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