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

Examiner Tuan S Nguyen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 513 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 Tuan S Nguyen has allowed 393 of 513 decided applications (77%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

77% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2145 · 81%AU 2171 · 56%AU 2179 · 93%AU 2144 · 78%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Tuan S Nguyen has a public record spanning 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 513 decided applications, the examiner issued allowances in 393 cases, yielding an overall allowance rate of 77%. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 56% to 93%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art-unit assignments and reflects the proportion of decided applications that received allowances over the period covered by the public record.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled, cross-art-unit record aggregates an examiner's decisions across multiple art units. The overall allowance rate (77%) describes the past record and is not a prediction of the outcome in any specific application. The range (56% to 93%) reflects variation among the examiner's individual art units but does not identify which rate applies to any particular art unit or technology area. Detailed per-art-unit records appear in a separate section of this page.

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 2145
277 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION224 / 53 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.3 moart unit avg 26.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.7 moart unit avg 45.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility36% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)58%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness53%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW59%+29 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 209 decided applications with an interview and 68 without.

ART UNIT 2171
126 APPS · 56% ALLOWANCE
56% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION70 / 56 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26 moart unit avg 22 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.3 moart unit avg 37.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 38%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)60%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness43%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW80%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW31%+49 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 64 decided applications with an interview and 62 without.

ART UNIT 2179
113 APPS · 93% ALLOWANCE
93% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION81 / 6 / 26allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.4 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY26.9 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility19% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 59 decided applications with an interview and 28 without.

ART UNIT 2144
23 APPS · 78% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
78% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION18 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION11.3 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY19.2 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility27% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)36%
§103 — Obviousness73% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness18%

Based on 23 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tuan S Nguyen

  • What is Examiner Nguyen's overall allowance rate?
    77% across 513 decided applications pooled from all art units in the examiner's record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    4 art units: 2144, 2145, 2171, and 2179, all within TC 2100.
  • How much does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    The allowance rate ranges from 56% to 93% across the examiner's art units with substantial records.
  • Does this pooled rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The pooled rate describes the past aggregate record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Tuan S 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: 539 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