Examiner Kristie D Shingles has allowed 51 of 96 decided applications (53%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Kristie D Shingles maintains a public record of 96 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those 96 decided applications, 51 were allowed and 45 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 53%. The examiner works within a single art unit. This pooled record reflects outcomes across all applications decided by this examiner in the technology center and does not constitute a prediction for any pending or future application.
This record aggregates all applications decided by the examiner across their art unit(s). The allowance rate reflects past decisions on applications that reached final disposition—either allowed or abandoned. Pooled figures describe historical outcomes and are correlational only; they are not predictions of the result in any individual case. An applicant's specific application may present different factual or legal circumstances.
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 artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 54 decided applications with an interview and 42 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kristie D Shingles 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: 96 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