LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Tan V Mai

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 2,086 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAR 2025
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Tan V Mai has allowed 1,872 of 2,086 decided applications (90%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

90% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2193 · 85%AU 2182 · 95%AU 2124 · 88%AU 2183 · 87%AU 2121 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Tan V Mai maintains a public record across five art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 2,086 disposed applications, the examiner has allowed 1,872 and abandoned 214, yielding an allowance rate of 90%. The allowance rate ranges from 85% to 95% across the examiner's art units, reflecting variation in the record within the technology center. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across all five art units and describes the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines data across multiple art units into a single aggregate profile. The overall allowance rate of 90% reflects past dispositions across all five art units together and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Similarly, the 85%–95% range shows where individual art units fall but does not indicate which unit will handle a particular case or what that case will receive. Pooled figures are historical summaries, not forecasts.

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 2193
991 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines software engineering, and error detection, correction, and monitoring.

85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 70%
DISPOSITION846 / 145 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION36 moart unit avg 30.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.5 moart unit avg 44 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)25%
§103 — Obviousness49% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW84%+14 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 83 decided applications with an interview and 908 without.

ART UNIT 2182
868 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines data-processing methods for specific functions, and processing data by its order or content.

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION826 / 42 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.2 moart unit avg 24.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.2 moart unit avg 37.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 31%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)34%
§103 — Obviousness46% · art unit 76%
§112 — Written description & definiteness31%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW95%+3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 132 decided applications with an interview and 736 without.

ART UNIT 2124
121 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION107 / 14 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.5 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
ART UNIT 2183
100 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution.

87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION87 / 13 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.1 moart unit avg 25 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.9 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility56% · art unit 34%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)28%
§103 — Obviousness41% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness24%
ART UNIT 2121
6 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION6 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION6.2 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY9.9 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tan V Mai

  • What is Examiner Mai's overall allowance rate?
    Over 2,086 disposed applications, Examiner Tan V Mai has an allowance rate of 90%. This is the share of decided cases (allowed plus abandoned) and does not include pending applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Examiner Tan V Mai has a public record spanning five art units (2121, 2124, 2182, 2183, 2193) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 85% to 95% across the examiner's art units. This range reflects differences in the record within TC 2100 but does not tie specific rates to specific units.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    The pooled record describes past outcomes across all art units together. It is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of how any individual application will be examined or decided.
◈ 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 Tan V Mai 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: 2,086 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