Examiner Manglesh M Patel

What the data says.

Manglesh M Patel maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 529 disposed applications, 341 were allowed and 188 abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 64% over the decided caseload. The examiner's record spans one art unit. This pooled figure reflects the cumulative outcome of applications decided in TC 2100 and is a historical summary of dispositions—not a prediction for any individual application.

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates all applications across the examiner's art units in TC 2100. The 64% allowance rate describes past decisions on a closed set of 529 applications. Pooled figures combine different art units and technologies and do not forecast the outcome of any particular filing. Any applicant's experience may differ based on application content, prior art, claim scope, and office actions.

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.

Questions about Examiner Manglesh M Patel

• 01What is Manglesh M Patel's allowance rate?

  64%, based on 341 allowed applications and 188 abandonments among 529 total disposed applications in TC 2100.
• 02How many art units does this examiner cover?

  One art unit (2178) within Technology Center 2100.
• 03What does the allowance rate mean?

  It is the percentage of decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) that were allowed. It describes historical outcomes and is not a prediction of any future application's result.
• 04Does this record apply to my application?

  This is a pooled, historical summary. Individual application outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, examiner reasoning, and responses to office actions—none of which are predicted by aggregate statistics.

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.