LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/TRI T NGUYEN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Tri T Nguyen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 194 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Tri T Nguyen has allowed 132 of 194 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

68% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2128 · 67%AU 2123 · 43%AU 2115 · 89%AU 2126 · 77%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Tri T Nguyen holds a public record of 228 total applications across four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 194 disposed applications, 132 were allowed, for an overall allowance rate of 68%. The examiner's record spans art units 2115, 2123, 2126, and 2128. Allowance rates across these art units range from 43% to 89%, reflecting variation in outcomes within the technology center.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates decisions across four separate art units. The 68% allowance rate represents the pooled outcome of 194 decided applications and describes the examiner's historical pattern, not a forecast of any specific case. Cross-art-unit records provide a broad snapshot; individual art units and application facts may differ materially from the aggregate. Pooled figures mask variation—as shown by the 43% to 89% range—so context matters.

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 2128
126 APPS · 67% ALLOWANCE

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

67% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION62 / 30 / 34allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION33 moart unit avg 30 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53 moart unit avg 46.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 65%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)94%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness72%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW71%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW63%+8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 52 decided applications with an interview and 40 without.

ART UNIT 2123
37 APPS · 43% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

43% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 51%
DISPOSITION16 / 21 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.2 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48.8 moart unit avg 43.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility43% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness68%

Based on 37 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2115
35 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 81%
DISPOSITION31 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.8 moart unit avg 25.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.8 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility40% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)57%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness51%

Based on 35 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2126
30 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

77% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION23 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.8 moart unit avg 29.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.6 moart unit avg 44.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility22% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)48%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness52%

Based on 30 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tri T Nguyen

  • What is Examiner Tri T Nguyen's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 68%, based on 132 allowed applications out of 194 disposed applications across all four art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner has a public record in four art units: 2115, 2123, 2126, and 2128, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 43% to 89%, indicating material variation in outcomes by art unit.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    This record describes historical decisions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The aggregate figure and range provide context only; individual cases depend on the merits and specific art unit assignment.
◈ 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 Tri T Nguyen 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: 228 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