Examiner Michael P Healey has allowed 26 of 40 decided applications (65%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Michael P Healey's public record spans 40 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those 40 decided applications, 26 were allowed and 14 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 65%. This figure represents the examiner's pooled record across a single art unit. The record reflects outcomes on applications that have reached final disposition; it does not include pending applications.
This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art unit(s). The allowance rate describes what happened in the past and is not a prediction about any specific application. Aggregate figures mask variation within and across art units. A single art-unit record may differ from the pooled average. These statistics are descriptive of historical outcomes 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.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Based on 40 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Michael P Healey 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: 40 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