Examiner Sean M Reilly has allowed 22 of 78 decided applications (28%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Sean M Reilly's public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spans one art unit. Across 78 disposed applications, 22 were allowed and 56 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 28%. This figure reflects the proportion of decided applications in the examiner's pooled record. The data presented here aggregates the examiner's work across all art units in TC 2100 and describes the historical record only.
A pooled record combines data from all art units under an examiner's name. The allowance rate (28%) and application counts reflect aggregate figures across those units and describe past outcomes, not predictions for any individual application. Different art units within TC 2100 may have different characteristics, subject matter, and prosecution patterns. Aggregate statistics do not forecast the result of any specific filing.
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 19 decided applications with an interview and 59 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Sean M Reilly 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: 78 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