Examiner Matthew Ell has allowed 268 of 401 decided applications (67%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Matthew Ell has a public record of 401 disposed applications across four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those decided applications, 268 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 67%. The examiner's allowance rate varies across the art units in which he maintains a substantial record, ranging from 54% to 96%. This pooled figure aggregates his work across art units 2141, 2145, 2171, and 2172 and reflects historical dispositions only.
A pooled record combines an examiner's statistics across multiple art units into a single aggregate figure. The overall allowance rate of 67% describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The range (54% to 96%) reflects variation among individual art units but does not identify which rate applies to which art unit. Pooled data provides context on an examiner's historical record without forecasting results in any particular technology area.
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 65 decided applications with an interview and 190 without.
Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 53 decided applications with an interview and 43 without.
Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Based on 34 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Based on 26 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Matthew Ell 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: 411 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