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

Examiner Selene Haedi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 126 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2023
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Selene Haedi has allowed 95 of 126 decided applications (75%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

75% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2128 · 81%AU 2121 · 64%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Selene Haedi maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning two art units. Across 126 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 95 and abandoned 31, yielding an allowance rate of 75%. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 64% to 81%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across both art units and describes the historical record of decided applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines data across multiple art units into a single aggregate figure. The 75% allowance rate represents past decisions on 126 applications across both art units and is a historical description only—not a prediction for any specific application. The range (64% to 81%) illustrates variation among the art units but does not indicate which specific unit will handle a particular filing or what its outcome will be.

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 2128
84 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines machine learning, and neural-network / biological-model computing.

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION68 / 16 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.3 moart unit avg 30 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.1 moart unit avg 46.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 65%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)81%
§103 — Obviousness82% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness69%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW84%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW74%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 61 decided applications with an interview and 23 without.

ART UNIT 2121
42 APPS · 64% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

64% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION27 / 15 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.1 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43.6 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility23% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)97%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness56%

Based on 42 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Selene Haedi

  • What is Examiner Haedi's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 75%, based on 126 disposed applications (95 allowed, 31 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Examiner Haedi maintains a record in 2 art units within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 64% to 81%. The pooled 75% figure aggregates all applications across both units.
  • What does this pooled record tell me about a specific application?
    The pooled figures describe the examiner's historical record and are not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Actual dispositions depend on claim scope, prior art, and other case-specific factors.
◈ 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 Selene Haedi 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: 126 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