Examiner Michael D Masinick has allowed 805 of 1,019 decided applications (79%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Michael D Masinick has a public record of 1,019 disposed applications across 5 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those decided applications, 805 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 79%. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 72% to 86% across these art units, reflecting variation in the record by art-unit subject matter. This pooled figure aggregates activity in art units 2117, 2122, 2125, 2127, and 2128.
A pooled record combines statistics across multiple art units with different subject-matter focuses within TC 2100. The overall allowance rate (79%) is a historical aggregate and describes the examiner's past decisions on disposed applications. It is not a prediction of the outcome in any individual pending application. The range (72% to 86%) shows that allowance rates vary by art unit; the pooled rate masks this variation but reflects the examiner's overall record across the technology center.
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 45 decided applications with an interview and 251 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 43 decided applications with an interview and 228 without.
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 67 decided applications with an interview and 134 without.
Primarily examines machine learning, and neural-network / biological-model computing.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 44 decided applications with an interview and 155 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Michael D Masinick 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: 1,019 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