LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/SHAHID K KHAN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Shahid K Khan

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 416 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Shahid K Khan has allowed 311 of 416 decided applications (75%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

75% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2178 · 71%AU 2146 · 84%AU 2175 · 83%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Shahid K Khan maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 416 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 75%. This rate reflects applications decided by allowance or abandonment, excluding pending matters. The examiner's record spans multiple art units; allowance rates across these units range from 71% to 84%. A pooled rate aggregates outcomes across distinct art-unit categories and does not represent a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across three art units in TC 2100. The overall allowance rate of 75% describes the examiner's past record on decided applications and reflects performance across different subject areas within the technology center. Pooled figures do not predict outcomes in any specific case. The range (71% to 84%) shows variation among the art units the examiner covers, indicating that outcomes differ by art unit. Detailed per-art-unit records appear separately.

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 2178
305 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE
71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION218 / 87 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.5 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.3 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)94%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness56%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW81%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW62%+19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 151 decided applications with an interview and 154 without.

ART UNIT 2146
133 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 50%
DISPOSITION78 / 15 / 40allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.9 moart unit avg 32 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.1 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility52% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)91%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness49%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW86%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW82%+4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 44 decided applications with an interview and 49 without.

ART UNIT 2175
18 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION15 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.2 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.8 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness13%

Based on 18 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Shahid K Khan

  • What is Shahid K Khan's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 75% across 416 disposed applications pooled across all art units in which the examiner has a substantial record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner maintains a public record in three art units within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 71% to 84% across the examiner's art units. Each art unit may show different outcomes; pooled figures aggregate all art units together.
  • Does the 75% rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes past outcomes on decided applications and is not a prediction for any specific application. Individual results vary by case, art unit, and application circumstances.
◈ 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 Shahid K Khan 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: 456 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