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

Examiner Mohammed R Uddin

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 806 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 Mohammed R Uddin has allowed 638 of 806 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 2161 · 100%AU 2169 · 50%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Mohammed R Uddin maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 806 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 79%. This figure represents applications decided—either allowed (638) or abandoned (168)—and excludes pending filings from the calculation. The allowance rate ranges from 74% to 100% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by subject-matter area within TC 2100.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, presenting an overall allowance rate derived from all decided applications. This aggregate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Variation across individual art units is normal and reflects differences in subject matter, applicant behavior, and case complexity. The pooled rate provides a baseline view of the examiner's historical record.

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
630 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

74% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION465 / 165 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.1 moart unit avg 24.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.5 moart unit avg 41.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility44% · art unit 43%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)26%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW57%+31 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 338 decided applications with an interview and 292 without.

ART UNIT 2161
207 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION170 / 0 / 37allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.4 moart unit avg 23.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY21.8 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)32%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness33%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW100%0 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 107 decided applications with an interview and 63 without.

ART UNIT 2169
6 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION3 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.1 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.8 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Mohammed R Uddin

  • What is Mohammed R Uddin's overall allowance rate?
    79%, based on 806 disposed applications (638 allowed, 168 abandoned). This rate describes past decisions and is not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    3 art units (2161, 2167, 2169) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 74% to 100% across the examiner's art units, reflecting differences in subject matter and case outcomes within TC 2100.
  • What does the pooled record mean?
    The pooled record aggregates all applications across all art units the examiner works in. It describes past dispositions and does not predict outcomes in 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 Mohammed R Uddin 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: 843 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