Examiner Miranda Le has allowed 445 of 625 decided applications (71%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Miranda Le maintains a pooled allowance rate of 71% across 625 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Her public record spans six art units: 2153, 2159, 2167, 2168, 2169, and 2177. Of 649 total applications, 445 were allowed and 180 abandoned. The allowance rate across these art units ranges from 47% to 76%, reflecting variation in outcomes by art-unit subject matter. This pooled figure represents the examiner's historical record and does not constitute a prediction for any specific application.
A pooled record aggregates an examiner's outcomes across multiple art units into a single allowance-rate figure. This aggregate describes past disposition patterns and provides context for understanding the examiner's record as a whole. The range shown (47% to 76%) indicates that allowance rates differ among the art units in which the examiner has worked. Pooled statistics are historical and are not predictions of any specific application's outcome.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 268 decided applications with an interview and 52 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 68 decided applications with an interview and 50 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 70 decided applications with an interview and 26 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 22 decided applications with an interview and 46 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Miranda Le 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: 649 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