Examiner Megan Elizabeth Hwang has allowed 14 of 27 decided applications (52%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Megan Elizabeth Hwang has a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 48 total applications, 27 have been disposed of (decided). Of those 27 decided applications, 14 were allowed and 13 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 52%. The examiner's practice spans a single art unit within TC 2100. This pooled record reflects outcomes across all applications in that art unit and is a description of past dispositions only.
A pooled record aggregates all applications across an examiner's assigned art units into one set of figures. The allowance rate (52% here) describes the share of decided applications that were allowed and is computed from the disposed (decided) count only—pending applications are excluded. This aggregate rate describes the examiner's historical record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
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.
Based on 48 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Megan Elizabeth Hwang 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: 48 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