LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/LIN LIN M HTAY
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Lin Lin M Htay

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 319 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Lin Lin M Htay has allowed 234 of 319 decided applications (73%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

73% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2153 · 77%AU 2156 · 46%AU 2115 · 50%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Lin Lin M Htay has a public record spanning 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 319 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 73%. The record reflects activity across multiple art units, with allowance rates ranging from 46% to 77% among those units. Of 363 total applications, 234 were allowed and 85 were abandoned. These figures describe the examiner's historical record and do not predict outcomes in any individual case.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates decisions across three separate art units within TC 2100. The 73% allowance rate is a pooled figure—the ratio of allowed to all decided applications across the entire set of art units combined. The range (46% to 77%) reflects variation among individual art units but does not identify which specific unit produced which rate. Pooled figures describe past performance only and are not predictive of results in any particular application.

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 2153
324 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

77% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION216 / 64 / 44allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.7 moart unit avg 27.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.1 moart unit avg 41.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility62% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)86%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness49%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW58%+27 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 201 decided applications with an interview and 79 without.

ART UNIT 2156
35 APPS · 46% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

46% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION16 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.7 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.5 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)59%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness63%

Based on 35 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2115
4 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 81%
DISPOSITION2 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.8 moart unit avg 25.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.7 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)33%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness33%

Based on 4 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Lin Lin M Htay

  • What is the overall allowance rate for Examiner Lin Lin M Htay?
    The allowance rate is 73%, calculated from 319 disposed applications (234 allowed, 85 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans 3 art units (2115, 2153, 2156) within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across art units?
    Allowance rates range from 46% to 77% across the art units with substantial records. The pooled rate of 73% reflects aggregated results across all three units.
  • Does this allowance rate apply to my application?
    This pooled record describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of outcomes in any specific case. Results vary by art unit, application complexity, and other factors.
◈ 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 Lin Lin M Htay 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: 363 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