Examiner Thomas C Lee has allowed 26 of 118 decided applications (22%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Thomas C Lee has a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning 2 art units. Over 118 disposed applications, he allowed 26 and abandoned 92, for an allowance rate of 22%. This figure represents the share of decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) in his pooled record. The allowance rate is calculated across all art units combined and does not break down by individual unit or predict outcomes in any specific application.
This record pools all of Thomas C Lee's applications across his assigned art units in TC 2100. The allowance rate of 22% describes historical outcomes across those units combined and is not a prediction about any particular case. Pooled figures aggregate different art units and different types of applications. Past data do not indicate how any future application will be examined or decided.
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 control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 20 decided applications with an interview and 97 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Thomas C Lee 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: 118 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