LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/MOHAMMED H REHMAN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Mohammed H Rehman

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 829 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Mohammed H Rehman has allowed 678 of 829 decided applications (82%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

82% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2116 · 68%AU 2187 · 94%AU 2118 · 80%AU 2176 · 96%AU 2112 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Mohammed H Rehman has a public record of 859 total applications across 5 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 829 disposed applications, 678 were allowed, yielding an 82% allowance rate. The examiner's allowance rate across his art units ranges from 68% to 96%, reflecting variation in the record by individual art unit. This pooled figure represents past decisions and does not predict outcomes in any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates decisions across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 82% pooled allowance rate is a historical summary of allowed versus abandoned applications; it describes the examiner's past decisions and is not a prediction applicable to any individual case. Applicants may review both the pooled rate and individual art-unit rates to understand the examiner's record across different subject areas within the technology center.

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 2116
319 APPS · 68% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

68% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION218 / 101 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.4 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.4 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility21% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW89%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW60%+29 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 90 decided applications with an interview and 229 without.

ART UNIT 2187
247 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION233 / 14 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.7 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.9 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility13% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)59%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW92%+5 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 115 decided applications with an interview and 132 without.

ART UNIT 2118
158 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE
80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION126 / 32 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.9 moart unit avg 22.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.4 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility24% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)53%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness38%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW72%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 63 decided applications with an interview and 95 without.

ART UNIT 2176
133 APPS · 96% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

96% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION99 / 4 / 30allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.1 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.3 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility10% · art unit 41%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)64%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness14%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW97%-2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 41 decided applications with an interview and 62 without.

ART UNIT 2112
2 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring, and error-correcting coding/decoding.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 89%
DISPOSITION2 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.9 moart unit avg 21.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY21 moart unit avg 31.8 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Mohammed H Rehman

  • What is Mohammed H Rehman's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 82%, based on 678 allowed applications out of 829 disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The examiner has a public record spanning 5 art units within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 68% to 96% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in the pooled record.
  • Does the 82% rate apply to my application?
    This pooled rate describes the examiner's historical 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 Mohammed H Rehman 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: 859 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