LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/STEVE N NGUYEN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Steve N Nguyen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 835 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Steve N Nguyen has allowed 611 of 835 decided applications (73%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

73% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2111 · 89%AU 2117 · 59%AU 2138 · 52%AU 2133 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Steve N Nguyen maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His pooled allowance rate is 73% across 835 disposed applications. The record spans art units 2111, 2117, 2133, and 2138. Allowance rates across these art units range from 52% to 89%, reflecting variation in the outcomes recorded within each unit's distinct subject-matter scope. This pooled figure aggregates all decided cases—both allowed and abandoned—and excludes pending applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates decision data across multiple art units and technology areas. The overall allowance rate (73%) describes historical outcomes on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific case. Because this examiner works across four distinct art units, the aggregate rate masks unit-specific variation; the 52% to 89% range indicates that outcomes differ by art unit. Pooled statistics characterize past patterns, not future performance on individual applications.

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 2111
446 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE
89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 80%
DISPOSITION359 / 46 / 41allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.5 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.9 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility38% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)38%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness58%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW86%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 197 decided applications with an interview and 208 without.

ART UNIT 2117
408 APPS · 59% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

59% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 74%
DISPOSITION240 / 168 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.7 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.6 moart unit avg 33.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility19% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness75%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW69%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW52%+17 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 154 decided applications with an interview and 254 without.

ART UNIT 2138
21 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION11 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.8 moart unit avg 19.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY50.6 moart unit avg 32.6 mo
ART UNIT 2133
1 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION1 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.5 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCYart unit avg 34.8 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Steve N Nguyen

  • What is Steve N Nguyen's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 73%, calculated across 835 disposed applications (allowed and abandoned combined) in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans 4 art units: 2111, 2117, 2133, and 2138, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across these art units range from 52% to 89%, indicating variation in outcomes by unit. The pooled 73% figure aggregates all four.
  • What does this pooled rate tell me about my application?
    The pooled rate describes historical outcomes and is not a prediction of any specific application's disposition. Individual results vary by art unit, technology, and case facts.
◈ 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 Steve N Nguyen 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: 876 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