Examiner Paul R Myers has allowed 877 of 1,084 decided applications (81%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Paul R Myers maintains a public record spanning 7 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 1,084 disposed applications, 877 were allowed, yielding an 81% allowance rate. The examiner's work is distributed across art units 2111, 2112, 2176, 2181, 2185, 2187, and 2189. Allowance rates among these art units range from 72% to 96%. The pooled 81% rate reflects the aggregate of all decided applications across this breadth of subject matter.
This record aggregates allowance outcomes across multiple art units in TC 2100. The pooled 81% figure represents historical outcomes on decided cases and is not predictive of any specific pending application. Individual art units within this examiner's portfolio show variation, with rates spanning 72% to 96%. A pooled record describes past decisions across different areas of computer architecture, software, and information security—not a uniform experience in any single art 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 →
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 42 decided applications with an interview and 307 without.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 78 decided applications with an interview and 243 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 49 decided applications with an interview and 98 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 45 decided applications with an interview and 110 without.
Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring, and error-correcting coding/decoding.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Primarily examines interconnection and data transfer between memory, I/O, and processing units, and program control and execution.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Paul R Myers 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: 1,111 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