Examiner Rokeya Shawali Alam has allowed 3 of 4 decided applications (75%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Rokeya Shawali Alam maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across one art unit, the examiner has disposed of 4 applications, with an allowance rate of 75%. This figure reflects 3 allowed applications out of the 4 decided cases in the pooled record. The examiner has also recorded 1 abandoned application and 34 total applications across the art unit. The allowance rate is calculated from decided applications only and does not include pending filings.
This record aggregates the examiner's work across all assigned art units and reflects historical dispositions. The allowance rate describes past outcomes on decided applications and is not predictive of the outcome in any particular application. Pooled figures mask variation by art unit; applicants may review per-art-unit statistics separately to understand performance in their specific classification.
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.
Based on 34 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Rokeya Shawali Alam 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: 34 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