Examiner Renee D Chavez has allowed 46 of 77 decided applications (60%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Renee D Chavez maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 121 total applications, 77 have been disposed of (allowed or abandoned). Of those 77 decided applications, 46 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 60%. The allowance rate across her art units ranges from 53% to 83%, reflecting variation in the decided outcomes within this examiner's pooled record.
This profile aggregates Renee D Chavez's record across multiple art units within TC 2100. A pooled allowance rate describes past outcomes across all her work in this technology center and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual art units may show different allowance rates; the range (53% to 83%) illustrates that variation. These figures describe the historical record only.
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 →
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.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 35 decided applications with an interview and 24 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Renee D Chavez 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: 121 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