LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/MOHAMMAD S ROSTAMI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Mohammad S Rostami

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 682 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Mohammad S Rostami has allowed 465 of 682 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

68% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2154 · 72%AU 2156 · 59%AU 2169 · 55%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Mohammad S Rostami has a public record of 741 total applications across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 682 disposed applications, 465 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 68%. The allowance rate varies across his art units, ranging from 55% to 72%. This pooled figure represents his historical record across all three art units combined and does not predict outcomes for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data from multiple art units into a single overall figure. The 68% allowance rate reflects all decided applications across Examiner Rostami's three art units in TC 2100, weighted by their respective volumes. This aggregate describes past decisions and is not a prediction of how any specific application will be examined or decided. Art-unit-specific rates may differ from the overall figure.

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 2154
534 APPS · 72% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

72% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION343 / 132 / 59allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.8 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.3 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility66% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)51%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW63%+22 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 193 decided applications with an interview and 282 without.

ART UNIT 2156
185 APPS · 59% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

59% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION110 / 75 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.7 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY56.2 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)39%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW65%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW56%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 72 decided applications with an interview and 113 without.

ART UNIT 2169
22 APPS · 55% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

55% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION12 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.1 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Mohammad S Rostami

  • What is Examiner Rostami's overall allowance rate?
    68% across 682 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • How many art units does Examiner Rostami work in?
    Three: art units 2154, 2156, and 2169.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across his art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 55% to 72% across these art units. This pooled 68% figure is an aggregate across all three.
  • Does this allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. Historical aggregate figures describe past decisions only and are not predictions of any specific application.
◈ 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 Mohammad S Rostami 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: 741 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