LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/QUOC LY PHU PHUNG
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Quoc Ly Phu Phung

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 29 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
45%vs 52% art-unit average7 pts

Examiner Quoc Ly Phu Phung has allowed 13 of 29 decided applications in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

allowed13abandoned16pending25· pending excluded from the rate
DATA UPDATED JULY 14, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Quoc Ly Phu Phung maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), spanning 1 art unit. Across dozens of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 45%. This figure represents the share of applications in the decided pool (allowed and abandoned combined) relative to total decided applications. The record reflects outcomes on completed applications within TC 2100; it does not include pending cases.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's history across all art units under their assignment. The allowance rate of 45% describes past dispositions on decided applications and reflects the examiner's overall record to date. Aggregate figures characterize historical performance and are not predictions about any specific application's outcome. Individual art units may show different rates; those figures appear separately on this page.

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 2143
54 APPS · 45% ALLOWANCE
45% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 52%
DISPOSITION13 / 16 / 25allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION35.7 moart unit avg 29.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47.9 moart unit avg 45.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
REJECTION RATE = SHARE OF THIS EXAMINER'S APPLICATIONS THAT DREW ≥1 OFFICE-ACTION REJECTION IN WHICH THE GROUND APPEARS

Grounds can co-occur, so the four don't sum to 100%. The art-unit figure is the unweighted mean across examiners in the art unit; §102 and §112 carry no art-unit benchmark.

§101 — Subject-matter eligibility86%art unit 52%+34 pts
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)20%no art-unit benchmark
§103 — Obviousness96%art unit 94%+2 pts
§112 — Written description & definiteness86%no art-unit benchmark
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Quoc Ly Phu Phung

  • What is this examiner's overall allowance rate?
    45% of decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined) received allowance across the examiner's pooled record in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 1 art unit.
  • What does this allowance rate mean for my application?
    The pooled allowance rate describes the examiner's historical record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual applications depend on claim language, prior art, and examination responses.
  • How large is the sample underlying these figures?
    The allowance rate reflects dozens of decided applications pooled across the examiner's art units.
◈ HOW LYNCH LLP CAN HELP

Where to go next.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. These are general resources about the firm's services — not advice about this examiner or any specific application.

Patent prosecution at Lynch LLPApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Work before the Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Planning a patent portfolio over timeHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.The firm's consultation optionsFree and paid consultation options across the firm's attorneys.
◈ 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 Quoc Ly Phu Phung 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 July 14, 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: 54 applications.

Rejection rates. Each §-rate is the share of this examiner's applications that drew at least one office-action rejection in which that statutory ground appears; applications with no rejection on record are excluded, and because grounds can co-occur the four do not sum to 100%. The art-unit figure beside each is the unweighted mean of the per-examiner rates across the art unit, published for §101 and §103 only. Beside the overall allowance rate we show a benchmark: for a single-art-unit examiner it is exactly that art unit's average, labeled “art-unit average”; for an examiner spanning several art units it is the “weighted peer average” — the per-art-unit averages, weighted by this examiner's application count in each — labeled distinctly because it is a blended figure, not any single art unit's average. Both are built from the same per-art-unit averages the panels show.

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