Examiner Robert E Fennema has allowed 189 of 367 decided applications (52%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Robert E Fennema maintains a public record of 369 total applications across five art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 367 decided applications, 189 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 51%. The examiner's record spans multiple art units (2117, 2118, 2124, 2126, 2183), with allowance rates ranging from 10% to 70% across these units. This range reflects variation in the examiner's decisions within TC 2100, though the pooled figure of 51% represents the aggregate outcome across all assigned work in this technology center.
This pooled record aggregates the examiner's work across five distinct art units within TC 2100. The overall allowance rate of 51% describes past decisions on 367 disposed applications and is not a prediction of the outcome for any specific pending application. Variation across individual art units exists, as shown by the 10% to 70% range. Pooled figures measure historical performance; individual application outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and examiner reasoning in each 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 →
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 program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 73 decided applications with an interview and 184 without.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 17 decided applications with an interview and 38 without.
Primarily examines control or regulating systems.
Based on 35 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Based on 21 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Based on 1 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Robert E Fennema 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: 369 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