Examiner Seth Andrew Raker has allowed 18 of 28 decided applications (64%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Seth Andrew Raker maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 28 disposed applications, he allowed 18 and abandoned 10, yielding a 64% allowance rate. His record spans one art unit. The allowance rate reflects decisions on applications that have been resolved; it does not include pending filings and is not predictive of outcomes in any individual case. This pooled figure aggregates his examination activity across all art units in TC 2100.
This profile presents pooled data across all art units where the examiner has worked. Aggregate allowance rates combine different art units' decisions and describe historical outcomes only. A pooled rate does not reveal performance within any specific art unit, nor does it predict how any particular application will be examined. The figures reported are correlational summaries of closed cases, not causal indicators or forecasts.
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 neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Based on 28 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Seth Andrew Raker 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: 28 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