LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/REZA U NABI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Reza U Nabi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 717 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Reza U Nabi has allowed 650 of 717 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

91% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2175 · 89%AU 2174 · 98%AU 2142 · 88%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Reza U Nabi maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning three art units: 2142, 2174, and 2175. Across 717 decided applications, the examiner allowed 650, yielding an allowance rate of 91%. The pooled record reflects work distributed across multiple art units within TC 2100, with allowance rates ranging from 88% to 98% among those units. Sixty-seven applications were abandoned. This aggregate figure describes the past record and is not a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates data from three separate art units within TC 2100. The 91% allowance rate is calculated from all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across those units combined. Pooled figures describe historical outcomes and do not predict the disposition of any individual application. The range of 88% to 98% illustrates variation among the constituent art units; the specific rate applicable to a given application depends on the art unit to which it is assigned.

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 2175
518 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION459 / 59 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.3 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY32 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility41% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)59%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness52%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW96%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW69%+27 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 371 decided applications with an interview and 147 without.

ART UNIT 2174
175 APPS · 98% ALLOWANCE
98% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION153 / 3 / 19allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.8 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.1 moart unit avg 42.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility32% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)49%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness24%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW98%0 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 112 decided applications with an interview and 44 without.

ART UNIT 2142
43 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION38 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.4 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.3 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility32% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)37%
§103 — Obviousness74% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness42%

Based on 43 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Reza U Nabi

  • What is Reza U Nabi's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 91%, based on 650 allowed applications out of 717 decided applications in the pooled record across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Reza U Nabi has a public record spanning three art units—2142, 2174, and 2175—all within Technology Center 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across art units?
    Allowance rates range from 88% to 98% among the examiner's art units. This range reflects variation in outcomes across different units within TC 2100 and does not predict any specific application's outcome.
  • Does the 91% rate apply to my application?
    The pooled 91% figure describes the past record and is not a prediction for any specific application. Actual outcomes depend on the merits of 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 Reza U Nabi 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: 736 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