Examiner Te Y Chen has allowed 362 of 529 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Te Y Chen maintains a pooled allowance rate of 68% across 529 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The examiner's record spans five art units: 2152, 2154, 2161, 2168, and 2171. Of the 529 decided applications, 362 were allowed and 167 abandoned. Allowance rates across these art units range from 53% to 83%, reflecting variation in the examiner's record within TC 2100. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate history and does not forecast the outcome of any individual application.
A pooled record aggregates an examiner's work across multiple art units into a single allowance figure. This 68% rate describes past decisions on 529 closed applications and reflects the examiner's overall pattern in TC 2100. The range (53% to 83%) shows that allowance rates differ among the examiner's art units. Pooled statistics describe historical record only and are not predictions of any specific application's outcome. Individual art-unit records provide more granular detail for applications in particular technical areas.
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 78 decided applications with an interview and 128 without.
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 64 decided applications with an interview and 81 without.
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 69 decided applications with an interview and 43 without.
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 37 decided applications with an interview and 25 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Te Y Chen 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: 529 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