Examiner Michael Zidanic has allowed 121 of 200 decided applications (61%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Michael Zidanic maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), spanning a single art unit. Across 200 disposed applications, 121 were allowed and 79 abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 61%. This rate reflects the ratio of decided applications only and does not include pending matters. The record covers work within one art unit and represents aggregated outcomes over the period examined.
This pooled record aggregates all applications across the examiner's art units. The allowance rate of 61% describes past dispositions and is correlational only—it is not a prediction of outcomes on any specific application. Pooled figures mask variation across different art units and technologies. Individual art-unit records, where available separately, provide subject-matter-specific context.
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 98 decided applications with an interview and 102 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Michael Zidanic 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: 200 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