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

Examiner Raheem Hoffler

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 477 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION FEB 2023
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Raheem Hoffler has allowed 290 of 477 decided applications (61%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

61% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2155 · 66%AU 2156 · 64%AU 2165 · 34%AU 2164 · 95%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Raheem Hoffler holds a public record across four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 477 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 290 and abandoned 187, yielding an overall allowance rate of 61%. Allowance rates across the examiner's individual art units range from 34% to 95%, reflecting variation in the record by subject matter within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates these distinct units and describes the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units and reflects past dispositions in aggregate form. The overall allowance rate of 61% describes what occurred across all decided applications in this examiner's history; it is not a prediction about any specific application. Individual art units within TC 2100 show different allowance rates. Aggregate statistics describe historical patterns, not outcomes for individual cases.

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 2155
271 APPS · 66% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

66% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION178 / 93 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.9 moart unit avg 27.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54 moart unit avg 42.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)78%
§103 — Obviousness81% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness24%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW77%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW52%+25 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 151 decided applications with an interview and 120 without.

ART UNIT 2156
95 APPS · 64% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

64% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION61 / 34 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.3 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54.9 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness36%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW73%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW43%+30 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 67 decided applications with an interview and 28 without.

ART UNIT 2165
90 APPS · 34% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

34% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION31 / 59 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.3 moart unit avg 22.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.1 moart unit avg 39.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility100% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness0% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW56%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW16%+40 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 41 decided applications with an interview and 49 without.

ART UNIT 2164
21 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION20 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.1 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43.9 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility44% · art unit 58%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)94%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%

Based on 21 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Raheem Hoffler

  • What is Raheem Hoffler's overall allowance rate?
    61%, calculated over 477 disposed applications (290 allowed, 187 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Four art units: 2155, 2156, 2164, and 2165, all within TC 2100.
  • What range of allowance rates appears across the art units?
    Allowance rates range from 34% to 95% across the examiner's individual art units.
  • What does this pooled record represent?
    An aggregate of historical dispositions across four art units. It describes past decisions, not a forecast for any individual application.
◈ 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 Raheem Hoffler 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: 477 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