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

Examiner Thuy T Bui

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 592 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION FEB 2024
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Thuy T Bui has allowed 473 of 592 decided applications (80%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

80% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2153 · 86%AU 2155 · 82%AU 2158 · 57%AU 2169 · 59%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Thuy T Bui maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 592 disposed applications, 473 were allowed, yielding an 80% allowance rate. The examiner's allowance rates across individual art units range from 57% to 86%. This pooled figure represents applications that have received final decisions—either allowance or abandonment—and does not include pending applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, presenting an overall allowance rate that reflects past dispositions across different subject areas. The aggregate rate of 80% describes historical outcomes on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual art units may show variation; the range (57% to 86%) reflects that spread. Each art unit's separate record is available in its own detailed section.

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 2153
256 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION221 / 35 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.6 moart unit avg 27.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.5 moart unit avg 41.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness24%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW51%+44 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 205 decided applications with an interview and 51 without.

ART UNIT 2155
243 APPS · 82% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

82% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION199 / 44 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19 moart unit avg 27.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.9 moart unit avg 42.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW68%+26 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 132 decided applications with an interview and 111 without.

ART UNIT 2158
76 APPS · 57% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

57% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 48%
DISPOSITION43 / 33 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.5 moart unit avg 23.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.4 moart unit avg 49.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)0%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW86%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW28%+58 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 37 decided applications with an interview and 39 without.

ART UNIT 2169
17 APPS · 59% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

59% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION10 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.3 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.8 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Thuy T Bui

  • What is Examiner Bui's overall allowance rate?
    80% across 592 disposed applications in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    4 art units (2153, 2155, 2158, 2169) within Technology Center 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the art units?
    Allowance rates range from 57% to 86% across these art units.
  • Does this pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The 80% figure describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application.
◈ 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 Thuy T Bui 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: 592 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