LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/SYED HAROON HASAN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Syed Haroon Hasan

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 850 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 Syed Haroon Hasan has allowed 707 of 850 decided applications (83%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

83% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2154 · 90%AU 2158 · 70%AU 2169 · 53%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Syed Haroon Hasan holds a public record of 910 applications across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 850 disposed applications, 707 were allowed, yielding an 83% allowance rate. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 70% to 90% across these art units. The record spans multiple distinct areas within TC 2100, aggregating outcomes from art units 2154, 2158, and 2169. This pooled figure represents past dispositions and does not forecast outcomes in any individual case.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's outcomes across multiple art units into a single historical snapshot. The 83% allowance rate reflects decided applications—allowed and abandoned combined—across all three art units. This aggregate figure describes what has occurred in the examiner's record and is not a prediction applicable to any specific pending application. The range (70% to 90%) indicates variation among the individual art units but does not identify which art unit produced which rate.

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 2154
639 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

90% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION519 / 60 / 60allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.7 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY32.6 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility67% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)86%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness68%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW86%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 219 decided applications with an interview and 360 without.

ART UNIT 2158
254 APPS · 70% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

70% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 48%
DISPOSITION179 / 75 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.1 moart unit avg 23.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54 moart unit avg 49.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility56% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)65%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness73%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW84%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW64%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 168 without.

ART UNIT 2169
17 APPS · 53% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

53% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION9 / 8 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.1 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.8 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Syed Haroon Hasan

  • What is Syed Haroon Hasan's overall allowance rate?
    The overall allowance rate is 83%, based on 707 allowed applications out of 850 disposed applications pooled across all three art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Syed Haroon Hasan has a substantial record in 3 art units within Technology Center 2100: art units 2154, 2158, and 2169.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 70% to 90% across the examiner's art units. This range reflects variation among individual art units but does not identify specific rates for specific units.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate mean for my application?
    The pooled figure is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual results depend on many 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 Syed Haroon Hasan 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: 910 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