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

Examiner Sabana Rahman

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 156 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION SEP 2016
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Sabana Rahman has allowed 73 of 156 decided applications (47%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

47% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2156 · 48%AU 2169 · 22%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Sabana Rahman maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning two art units. Across 156 disposed applications, 73 were allowed and 83 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 47%. This rate reflects the examiner's decisions on applications that reached final disposition. The pooled figure aggregates outcomes across both art units and does not isolate performance in any particular subject area within TC 2100.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines data from multiple art units into a single aggregate allowance rate. This figure describes the examiner's historical decision pattern across all assigned units and is not a prediction of outcomes in any specific application. The 47% rate reflects past dispositions and provides context for the examiner's overall practice, but each application's outcome depends on its own facts and claims.

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 2156
147 APPS · 48% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

48% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION71 / 76 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.7 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility53% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)54%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness19%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW65%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW39%+26 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 54 decided applications with an interview and 93 without.

ART UNIT 2169
9 APPS · 22% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

22% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION2 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.2 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Sabana Rahman

  • What is Sabana Rahman's overall allowance rate?
    Across 156 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 47%, meaning 73 applications were allowed and 83 were abandoned.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    The pooled record spans 2 art units (2156 and 2169) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does this allowance rate predict what will happen to my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • Why is this record pooled across art units?
    This section aggregates the examiner's decisions across all assigned art units to show overall performance. Separate art-unit detail appears in another section of this page.
◈ 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 Sabana Rahman 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: 156 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