LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/PHONG H DANG
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Phong H Dang

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 431 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Phong H Dang has allowed 361 of 431 decided applications (84%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

84% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2184 · 95%AU 2185 · 69%AU 2111 · 67%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Phong H Dang maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 431 disposed applications, 361 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 84%. The record spans art units 2111, 2184, and 2185. Across these art units, allowance rates range from 69% to 95%, reflecting variation in the examiner's pooled decisions within TC 2100. This aggregate figure represents past dispositions and does not constitute a prediction about any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled examiner record aggregates statistics across multiple art units to provide a single profile view. The overall allowance rate reflects historical decisions on all disposed applications combined. This figure describes the past record and is not a prediction of any individual application's outcome. Variation across art units, shown by the range, indicates differences in prosecution patterns by technology area but does not signal any causal relationship between art unit and allowance.

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 2184
276 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines interconnection and data transfer between memory, I/O, and processing units.

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION236 / 13 / 27allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.7 moart unit avg 20.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.3 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 17%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)69%
§103 — Obviousness80% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness52%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW93%+5 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 163 without.

ART UNIT 2185
179 APPS · 69% ALLOWANCE
69% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION123 / 56 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.7 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility18% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)64%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness69%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW77%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW62%+15 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 78 decided applications with an interview and 101 without.

ART UNIT 2111
3 APPS · 67% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
67% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 80%
DISPOSITION2 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.3 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY26.9 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 3 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Phong H Dang

  • What is Phong H Dang's overall allowance rate?
    The overall allowance rate is 84%, calculated from 361 allowed applications out of 431 disposed applications in the pooled record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's record spans three art units (2111, 2184, and 2185) within TC 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the three art units range from 69% to 95%. This range reflects differences in historical decisions by art unit but does not predict outcomes in any specific case.
◈ 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 Phong H Dang 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: 458 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