Examiner Michael B Holmes has allowed 1,503 of 1,654 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Michael B Holmes maintains a public record spanning 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 1,654 disposed applications, he issued allowances in 1,503 cases, yielding an allowance rate of 91%. The allowance rate ranges from 70% to 97% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by subject matter and application characteristics within TC 2100. This pooled figure represents decided cases only and does not include pending applications.
A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, creating a single overall figure that reflects the examiner's combined history. The 91% allowance rate describes past outcomes across 1,654 decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Variation across individual art units (70% to 97%) is normal and reflects differences in subject matter, applicant behavior, and case-specific factors. Pooled statistics describe historical frequency, not likelihood in any individual case.
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 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 50 decided applications with an interview and 1,043 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 55 decided applications with an interview and 223 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 86 decided applications with an interview and 113 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 36 decided applications with an interview and 48 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Michael B Holmes 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: 1,654 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