LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/USMAAN SAEED
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Usmaan Saeed

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 211 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Usmaan Saeed has allowed 106 of 211 decided applications (50%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

50% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2166 · 55%AU 2169 · 18%AU 2146 · 86%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Usmaan Saeed maintains a public record of 227 total applications across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 211 disposed applications, 106 were allowed, for an overall allowance rate of 50%. The examiner's work spans multiple art units within TC 2100, and allowance rates across these units range from 18% to 86%. This pooled figure reflects the combined record and does not represent any single art unit's outcome distribution.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled, cross-art-unit record aggregates applications and dispositions across multiple art units, masking variation among them. The overall allowance rate of 50% describes past decided applications and is not a prediction about any specific future application. Individual art-unit records, where available separately, may differ substantially from this aggregate figure. Pooled statistics are historical summaries only.

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 2166
159 APPS · 55% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

55% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION87 / 72 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.4 moart unit avg 23.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY60.6 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility45% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)18%
§103 — Obviousness64% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness9%
// 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 76 decided applications with an interview and 83 without.

ART UNIT 2169
38 APPS · 18% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

18% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION7 / 31 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.2 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY57.4 moart unit avg 40 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility54% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)60%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness49%

Based on 38 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2146
30 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 50%
DISPOSITION12 / 2 / 16allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.4 moart unit avg 32 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.8 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility83% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)63%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness67%

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

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Usmaan Saeed

  • What is Examiner Saeed's overall allowance rate?
    106 allowed applications out of 211 disposed applications yields an allowance rate of 50%.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Examiner Saeed has a public record spanning 3 art units in TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 18% to 86% across the examiner's art units with a substantial record.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate mean for my application?
    The 50% figure is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual art-unit records may differ from this pooled rate.
◈ 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 Usmaan Saeed 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: 227 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