Examiner Nimesh G Patel has allowed 662 of 877 decided applications (75%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Nimesh G Patel has a public record spanning 6 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 877 decided applications, the examiner issued allowances in 662 cases, for an allowance rate of 75%. The record reflects work across multiple art units, with allowance rates ranging from 55% to 92% across these art units. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes from all six art units and describes the examiner's past record without predicting outcomes in any specific application.
This profile reports the examiner's pooled allowance rate across six art units in TC 2100. The 75% figure aggregates all decided applications—both allowed and abandoned—across different art units and subject areas. A pooled rate describes historical outcomes but is not a prediction of any specific application's result. To understand variance across different subject areas within the examiner's practice, review the per-art-unit section separately.
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 73 decided applications with an interview and 224 without.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 59 decided applications with an interview and 225 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 42 decided applications with an interview and 92 without.
Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 43 decided applications with an interview and 54 without.
Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring, and error-correcting coding/decoding.
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 46 without.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Nimesh G Patel 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: 902 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