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

Examiner Phuong H Nguyen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 342 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Phuong H Nguyen has allowed 234 of 342 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

68% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2142 · 56%AU 2174 · 85%AU 2143 · 92%AU 2144 · 81%AU 2173 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Phuong H Nguyen maintains a public record across 5 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 342 disposed applications, the overall allowance rate is 68%. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 56% to 92% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes within TC 2100. A total of 234 applications were allowed and 108 were abandoned across the pooled record.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes from multiple art units within TC 2100, combining different subject-matter areas into a single profile. The 68% allowance rate describes past decisions on 342 applications that were resolved. Aggregate statistics characterize historical performance and are not predictions about any specific application's outcome. Individual art-unit records may show different rates and are detailed 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 →

// 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 2142
197 APPS · 56% ALLOWANCE

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

56% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION110 / 87 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.9 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY51.7 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)83%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness61%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW72%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW32%+40 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 118 decided applications with an interview and 79 without.

ART UNIT 2174
93 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE
85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION56 / 10 / 27allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.2 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28.8 moart unit avg 42.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility22% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)89%
§103 — Obviousness56% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness38%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW76%+24 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 25 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.

ART UNIT 2143
60 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE
92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 52%
DISPOSITION55 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.1 moart unit avg 29.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.2 moart unit avg 45.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility7% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)91%
§103 — Obviousness51% · art unit 94%
§112 — Written description & definiteness38%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW69%+31 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 44 decided applications with an interview and 16 without.

ART UNIT 2144
16 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION13 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.8 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.9 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness71% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness36%

Based on 16 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2173
3 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION0 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.2 moart unit avg 25.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

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

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Phuong H Nguyen

  • What is Phuong H Nguyen's overall allowance rate?
    The overall allowance rate is 68%, calculated across 342 disposed applications pooled from all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner has a public record spanning 5 art units: 2142, 2143, 2144, 2173, and 2174, all within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across art units?
    Allowance rates range from 56% to 92% across the examiner's art units, indicating variation in outcomes within each art unit's record.
  • What do these statistics mean for my application?
    These figures describe the examiner's historical record and are not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Prosecution depends on claim scope, prior art, and arguments specific to each 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 Phuong H Nguyen 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: 369 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