Examiner Nathan E Price has allowed 19 of 48 decided applications (40%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Nathan E Price maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 48 disposed applications, 19 were allowed and 29 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 40%. This rate reflects decisions on applications that have been resolved; pending applications are excluded from the calculation. The examiner's record spans one art unit. The 40% allowance rate describes the examiner's historical record across decided cases and does not characterize performance on any individual application.
This pooled record aggregates data across all of the examiner's art units, presenting an overall picture of allowances and abandonments. The allowance rate of 40% is computed from 48 disposed applications and describes past outcomes only. Aggregate statistics do not predict outcomes on specific applications or indicate how any future case will be examined. Individual applications may have distinct procedural and technical circumstances not reflected in overall figures.
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 program control and execution.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Nathan E Price 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: 48 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