Examiner Thomas Ho has allowed 39 of 58 decided applications (67%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Thomas Ho maintains a public record across two art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 58 disposed applications, his allowance rate stands at 67%, meaning 39 applications were allowed and 19 abandoned. The allowance rate ranges from 62% to 76% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by art-unit assignment. This pooled figure aggregates his record in art units 2132 and 2134 and describes historical dispositions without bearing on any individual pending application.
A pooled record combines outcomes across multiple art units into a single aggregate allowance rate. This figure describes what occurred in the examiner's past dispositions and does not predict results in any specific case. Variation across individual art units—shown by the 62% to 76% range—reflects different subject-matter complexities and application pools within TC 2100. Aggregate statistics are correlational historical snapshots, not causal 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 →
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 network security, and computer and data security.
Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Thomas Ho 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: 58 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