Examiner Steve Peter Golden has allowed 40 of 137 decided applications (29%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Steve Peter Golden maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) across one art unit. Over 137 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 40 and abandoned 97. The allowance rate stands at 29% of decided applications. This pooled figure reflects the examiner's aggregate record across all assigned art units and represents historical outcomes on applications that reached final disposition.
A pooled record aggregates all art units under an examiner's assignment and reflects past outcomes across that combined set of applications. The allowance rate describes historical decided cases and is not a prediction about any specific application. Pooled figures mask variation between individual art units; per-art-unit breakdowns appear in separate data sections and provide more granular subject-matter context.
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.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 72 decided applications with an interview and 65 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Steve Peter Golden 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: 137 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