Examiner Kurt Nicholas Pressly has allowed 6 of 23 decided applications (26%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Patent Examiner Kurt Nicholas Pressly maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His pooled record spans one art unit and covers 68 total applications. Of 23 disposed applications, 6 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 26 percent. Seventeen applications were abandoned. The allowance rate of 26 percent represents the proportion of decided cases—allowed and abandoned applications combined—and does not reflect the share of all filings. This figure describes the examiner's historical record and is not a prediction of outcomes in any specific application.
This profile presents pooled statistics across all art units handled by this examiner. Aggregate figures describe the examiner's past record and provide context for understanding disposition patterns. The allowance rate is calculated from decided applications only (allowed plus abandoned), excluding pending cases. Pooled data combines different art units and does not forecast results in individual applications or predict how any particular case will be examined.
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 neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Kurt Nicholas Pressly 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: 68 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