Examiner Taelor Kim has allowed 215 of 376 decided applications (57%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Taelor Kim's public record spans Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security), art unit 2156. Across 376 disposed applications, Kim allowed 215 and abandoned 161, for an allowance rate of 57% over the decided count. This figure reflects the examiner's pooled record and describes applications that have reached final disposition. The record does not include pending applications.
This pooled record aggregates Kim's work across a single art unit within TC 2100. The 57% allowance rate is a historical summary of decided cases and does not forecast the outcome of any individual application. Pooled figures describe past dispositions; they are not predictions. Individual applications vary in complexity, claim scope, and prior art, and each receives independent examination.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 209 decided applications with an interview and 167 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Taelor Kim 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: 376 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