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

Examiner Rehana Perveen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 6 ART UNITS · 192 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 6 ART UNITS

Examiner Rehana Perveen has allowed 176 of 192 decided applications (92%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

92% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2116 · 93%AU 2182 · 96%AU 2189 · 100%AU 2155 · 0%AU 2129 · 0%AU 2148 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Rehana Perveen has a public record spanning six art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 192 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 92%. The range of allowance rates among these art units extends from 93% to 100%, reflecting variation in outcomes across the different subject-matter areas within TC 2100. The examiner has allowed 176 applications and seen 16 abandoned. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across all six art units and describes the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled examiner record combines statistics from multiple art units into a single aggregate. The overall allowance rate reflects past decisions across all units combined and is not a prediction for any particular application. Because different art units address different technical subject matter, the range between the lowest and highest unit allowance rates illustrates variation in outcomes by field. Pooled figures are historical summaries; they do not forecast the disposition of any specific case.

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 2116
90 APPS · 93% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

93% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION84 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.8 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.8 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
ART UNIT 2182
67 APPS · 96% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines data-processing methods for specific functions, and processing data by its order or content.

96% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION64 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16 moart unit avg 24.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.4 moart unit avg 37.3 mo
ART UNIT 2189
31 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 77%
DISPOSITION26 / 0 / 5allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION34.9 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)74%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness48%

Based on 31 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2155
5 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION0 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.5 moart unit avg 27.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY56.5 moart unit avg 42.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 5 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2129
2 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION0 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.2 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.2 moart unit avg 42.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility100% · art unit 63%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 2 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2148
2 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION2 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.5 moart unit avg 29.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.7 moart unit avg 42.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 2 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Rehana Perveen

  • What is Examiner Perveen's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 92%, calculated from 192 disposed applications (176 allowed, 16 abandoned). This is a historical summary and is not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does Examiner Perveen work in?
    The examiner has a public record spanning six art units within Technology Center 2100: 2116, 2129, 2148, 2155, 2182, and 2189.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across Examiner Perveen's art units?
    Yes. The allowance rates range from 93% to 100% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes among the different subject-matter areas within TC 2100.
◈ 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 Rehana Perveen 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: 197 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