LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/MICHAEL PHAM
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Michael Pham

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 679 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Michael Pham has allowed 536 of 679 decided applications (79%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

79% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2167 · 74%AU 2153 · 99%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Michael Pham maintains an allowance rate of 79% across 679 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His record spans two art units within this technology center. The allowance rate across these art units ranges from 74% to 99%, reflecting variation in outcomes by art unit. This pooled figure represents applications that have been decided—either allowed or abandoned—and excludes pending matters. The record is based on public USPTO data and describes past dispositions only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates applications across multiple art units within TC 2100. The overall allowance rate reflects the historical share of decided applications that were allowed, computed from the total disposed count. An aggregate figure describes the examiner's past record and is not a prediction of the outcome in any specific application. Art-unit variation is normal; the range shown indicates that outcomes differ across the individual art units represented in this pooled data.

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 →

// BY ART UNIT

The record, art unit by art unit.

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.

◈ PRIMARY · ART UNIT 2167
542 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

74% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION401 / 141 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.9 moart unit avg 24.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.5 moart unit avg 41.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 43%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness47% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness56%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW62%+26 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 250 decided applications with an interview and 292 without.

ART UNIT 2153
157 APPS · 99% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

99% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION135 / 2 / 20allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20 moart unit avg 27.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY20.3 moart unit avg 41.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)73%
§103 — Obviousness44% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness47%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW96%+4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 90 decided applications with an interview and 47 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Michael Pham

  • What is Michael Pham's overall allowance rate?
    79% of his 679 disposed applications were allowed. This figure pools his record across all art units and describes past dispositions only.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Michael Pham's record spans 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • What is the range of allowance rates across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 74% to 99% across his art units. This variation reflects differences in outcomes by individual art unit.
  • Does this record predict the outcome of my application?
    No. This pooled figure describes the examiner's past record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ RESPONDING TO AN OFFICE ACTION

Strategy, not paperwork. Talk to the attorney doing the work.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. Book a consultation to discuss your matter with the attorney who would handle it.

Book a 30-minute consultation →
METHODOLOGY & DISCLOSURES

Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Michael Pham 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: 699 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