LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/NUPUR DEBNATH
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Nupur Debnath

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 89 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Nupur Debnath has allowed 58 of 89 decided applications (65%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

65% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2148 · 70%AU 2186 · 67%AU 2189 · 63%AU 2129 · 43%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Nupur Debnath maintains a public record across four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 89 disposed applications, the allowance rate stands at 65%. This pooled figure reflects both allowed and abandoned applications decided by the examiner across these art units. The allowance rate ranges from 63% to 70% across the individual art units, reflecting variation in the examiner's record within TC 2100. The examiner's public record spans 115 total applications, of which 58 were allowed and 31 abandoned.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's record across multiple art units in a single technology center. The pooled allowance rate describes past dispositions and does not predict outcomes in any specific application. When an examiner works across several art units, their aggregate rate can mask meaningful differences in allowance rates unit by unit. For detail on variation across individual art units, refer to the per-art-unit section. Pooled figures are historical measures only.

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 2148
46 APPS · 70% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

70% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION32 / 14 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.5 moart unit avg 29.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.6 moart unit avg 42.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility78% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)93%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness41%

Based on 46 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2186
38 APPS · 67% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

67% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION8 / 4 / 26allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION36.3 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.4 moart unit avg 35 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility63% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)83%
§103 — Obviousness83% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 38 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2189
24 APPS · 63% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

63% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 77%
DISPOSITION15 / 9 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION32 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48.1 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility79% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness83% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness67%

Based on 24 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2129
7 APPS · 43% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

43% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION3 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.6 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.7 moart unit avg 42.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility67% · art unit 63%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness83%

Based on 7 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Nupur Debnath

  • What is Nupur Debnath's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 65%, calculated over 89 disposed applications (allowed and abandoned cases). This is a historical measure and is not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Nupur Debnath's public record spans four art units (2129, 2148, 2186, 2189) within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    The allowance rate ranges from 63% to 70% across the examiner's individual art units. This variation reflects differences in the examiner's record within TC 2100.
  • Does the pooled rate apply to my application?
    No. The pooled rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction for any specific application. Allowance rates vary by art unit. For your art unit, refer to the per-art-unit section.
◈ 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 Nupur Debnath 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: 115 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