Examiner Maryam M Ipakchi has allowed 146 of 212 decided applications (69%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Maryam M Ipakchi maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 212 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 146 and abandoned 66, yielding an allowance rate of 69% over the decided pool. The record spans one art unit (2171). This aggregate figure reflects the examiner's historical disposition of applications within TC 2100 and does not indicate the outcome of any pending or future application.
This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art unit(s). The 69% allowance rate describes past dispositions—allowed and abandoned applications as a share of all decided cases—and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Pooled figures smooth variation across different art units and technologies, so individual applications may experience different patterns. The data reflects historical record only.
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 113 decided applications with an interview and 99 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Maryam M Ipakchi 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: 212 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