Examiner Maria N Von Buhr has allowed 568 of 746 decided applications (76%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Maria N Von Buhr maintains a pooled allowance rate of 76% across 746 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Her record spans five art units: 2117, 2121, 2125, 2126, and 2171. The allowance rate ranges from 68% to 81% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes across different subject-matter areas within TC 2100. This pooled figure represents applications that have been decided—either allowed or abandoned—and does not include pending applications.
This pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units within TC 2100, combining different subject-matter specializations into a single statistic. The overall allowance rate describes the examiner's past record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The range of rates across individual art units reflects differences in how applications are resolved in each unit. Pooled figures are most useful as a general measure of the examiner's historical record across the full scope of her assigned work.
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 control or regulating systems.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 215 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 31 decided applications with an interview and 179 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 23 decided applications with an interview and 155 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 15 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Maria N Von Buhr 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: 746 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