Examiner Nan Hutton has allowed 175 of 246 decided applications (71%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Nan Hutton maintains a pooled allowance rate of 71% across 246 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The examiner works across 5 art units: 2152, 2154, 2155, 2163, and 2169. Allowance rates across these art units range from 53% to 91%, reflecting variation in the examiner's record by subject matter within TC 2100. This pooled figure represents the examiner's overall record and describes past dispositions only.
A pooled record aggregates an examiner's work across multiple art units into a single allowance rate. This aggregate describes the examiner's historical disposition of applications and does not predict the outcome of any specific filing. The range from minimum to maximum allowance rates shows variation across different art units; individual applications fall within the particular art unit's record, not necessarily the overall pool.
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 95 decided applications with an interview and 42 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 18 decided applications with an interview and 35 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Based on 44 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Based on 10 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Based on 2 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Nan Hutton 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: 246 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