LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/KIM T HUYNH
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Kim T Huynh

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 846 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Kim T Huynh has allowed 687 of 846 decided applications (81%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

81% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2111 · 73%AU 2184 · 94%AU 2185 · 79%AU 2112 · 85%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Kim T Huynh maintains an overall allowance rate of 81% across 846 decided applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The examiner's record spans four art units: 2111, 2112, 2184, and 2185. Of the 885 total applications on file, 687 have been allowed and 159 abandoned. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 73% to 94%. This pooled figure represents the aggregate record and describes historical outcomes rather than a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This page presents a pooled record aggregating Kim T Huynh's work across four art units within TC 2100. Pooled figures—such as the 81% allowance rate—combine outcomes from different subject-matter areas and reflect past disposition patterns. The allowance rate is computed from decided applications only (allowed plus abandoned), excluding pending cases. Aggregate statistics describe the examiner's historical record and are not predictions of outcomes for specific applications.

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 →

// BY ART UNIT

The record, art unit by art unit.

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.

◈ PRIMARY · ART UNIT 2111
319 APPS · 73% ALLOWANCE
73% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 80%
DISPOSITION233 / 86 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.9 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.6 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility6% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)88%
§103 — Obviousness57% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness6%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW79%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW72%+7 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 56 decided applications with an interview and 263 without.

ART UNIT 2184
254 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines interconnection and data transfer between memory, I/O, and processing units.

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION203 / 12 / 39allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.9 moart unit avg 20.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.9 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility8% · art unit 17%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)95%
§103 — Obviousness77% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW91%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 76 decided applications with an interview and 139 without.

ART UNIT 2185
240 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE
79% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION190 / 50 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.5 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.9 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility24% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)88%
§103 — Obviousness71% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness31%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW87%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW77%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 47 decided applications with an interview and 193 without.

ART UNIT 2112
72 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring, and error-correcting coding/decoding.

85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 89%
DISPOSITION61 / 11 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.4 moart unit avg 21.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.1 moart unit avg 31.8 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW73%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW90%-17 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 22 decided applications with an interview and 50 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Kim T Huynh

  • What is Kim T Huynh's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 81%, based on 846 decided applications (687 allowed, 159 abandoned). This figure aggregates the record across all four art units and describes past outcomes, not predictions.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Kim T Huynh has a public record in four art units—2111, 2112, 2184, and 2185—all within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Does the allowance rate vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 73% to 94% across the examiner's art units. This pooled record combines outcomes from all four units; individual art-unit rates are shown separately in their dedicated sections.
  • Does this pooled record predict my application's outcome?
    No. These figures describe the examiner's historical record in aggregate and across multiple art units. They do not predict outcomes for any specific application.
◈ RESPONDING TO AN OFFICE ACTION

Strategy, not paperwork. Talk to the attorney doing the work.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. Book a consultation to discuss your matter with the attorney who would handle it.

Book a 30-minute consultation →
METHODOLOGY & DISCLOSURES

Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kim T Huynh 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: 885 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