Examiner Le Hien Luu

What the data says.

Examiner Le Hien Luu maintains a public record of 240 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), spanning 2 art units. Of these decided applications, 189 were allowed and 51 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 79%. This pooled figure represents the examiner's overall record across both art units combined and does not isolate outcomes by individual art unit or technology specialty.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's work across multiple art units into a single metric. The 79% allowance rate reflects historical outcomes across all cases in those units combined. This aggregate figure describes what occurred in the past and is not a prediction about any specific future application. Individual art-unit records, available separately, may show variation from the pooled average.

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 →

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.

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

Questions about Examiner Le Hien Luu

• 01What is Examiner Luu's overall allowance rate?

  79%, based on 189 allowed applications out of 240 total disposed applications in the examiner's pooled record.
• 02How many art units does this record cover?

  Two: art units 2141 and 2152. The figures presented are pooled across both units and do not isolate outcomes by individual unit.
• 03What does the allowance rate tell me about my application?

  The allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Prosecution results depend on claim scope, prior art, examiner analysis, and applicant responses.
• 04Does this examiner work in my technology area?

  This record covers TC 2100. Confirm that your application's classification falls within Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

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.