Examiner Sargon N Nano has allowed 64 of 105 decided applications (61%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Sargon N Nano has disposed of 105 applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those decided applications, 64 were allowed and 41 were abandoned, resulting in an allowance rate of 61%. The examiner's public record spans a single art unit within TC 2100. This pooled figure reflects the examiner's overall allowance rate across all applications in their record and does not constitute a prediction for any individual case.
A pooled record aggregates data across all art units assigned to an examiner. The allowance rate shown reflects historical outcomes across that combined body of work. Aggregate figures describe past performance and are correlational only—they do not forecast outcomes in any specific application. Individual art units may show different patterns; per-unit detail appears in a separate section.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 29 decided applications with an interview and 76 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Sargon N Nano 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: 105 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