LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/NITIN C PATEL
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Nitin C Patel

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 943 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAR 2025
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Nitin C Patel has allowed 858 of 943 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

91% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2116 · 86%AU 2186 · 94%AU 2175 · 100%AU 2185 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Nitin C Patel maintains a public record across 4 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 943 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 858, yielding an overall allowance rate of 91%. This rate reflects decided cases (allowed and abandoned applications) pooled across all four art units. The allowance rate ranges from 86% to 100% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by art unit. The pooled figure aggregates this variation into a single measure of the examiner's overall record in TC 2100.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled allowance rate aggregates results across multiple art units into a single figure. This examiner works across 4 art units, each of which may have different allowance rates. The overall 91% figure describes what has occurred in the past across all these units combined and is not a prediction about any specific application. Applicants may review art-unit-specific records separately to see how outcomes vary by unit.

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
470 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION405 / 65 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.1 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.4 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)74%
§103 — Obviousness62% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness65%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW84%+7 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 149 decided applications with an interview and 321 without.

ART UNIT 2186
361 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION341 / 20 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.9 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY23.9 moart unit avg 35 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)79%
§103 — Obviousness66% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness55%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 213 decided applications with an interview and 148 without.

ART UNIT 2175
111 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE

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

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION111 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.3 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY19.8 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%
// 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 47 decided applications with an interview and 64 without.

ART UNIT 2185
1 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION1 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.6 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY22.3 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Nitin C Patel

  • What is Nitin C Patel's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner allowed 858 of 943 disposed applications, an allowance rate of 91%.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Nitin C Patel has a record across 4 art units: 2116, 2175, 2185, and 2186, all within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 86% to 100% across these art units. The pooled 91% figure aggregates these different rates.
  • Is the pooled rate a prediction for my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes historical outcomes across all four art units combined 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 Nitin C 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: 943 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