Examiner Lana Alagic has allowed 42 of 47 decided applications (89%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Lana Alagic maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Her pooled record across all art units spans 47 disposed applications, of which 42 were allowed and 5 were abandoned. This corresponds to an allowance rate of 89% over the decided application count. The examiner's work is concentrated in a single art unit. The allowance rate reflects historical dispositions and does not constitute a forecast for any pending or future application.
This pooled record aggregates all of the examiner's art units into a single allowance-rate figure. The 89% rate describes what has occurred in past decided applications—allowed and abandoned cases combined—and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Pooled records combine different subject areas and prosecution contexts, so the aggregate figure serves as background context rather than a basis for case-specific expectations.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Based on 47 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Lana Alagic 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: 47 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