LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/VINCENT HUY TRAN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Vincent Huy Tran

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,420 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 Vincent Huy Tran has allowed 1,232 of 1,420 decided applications (87%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

87% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2115 · 86%AU 2116 · 92%AU 2121 · 94%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Vincent Huy Tran's public record spans Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) across three art units: 2115, 2116, and 2121. Over 1,467 total applications, 1,232 were allowed and 188 were abandoned, yielding 1,420 decided applications. His pooled allowance rate is 87%, meaning that of the 1,420 decided applications, 87% resulted in allowance. Allowance rates across his art units range from 86% to 94%, reflecting variation in the composition of applications handled within each unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units in TC 2100. The allowance rate describes historical outcomes on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Cross-art-unit records reflect the mix of patent subject matter and application characteristics within each unit. Aggregate statistics do not indicate how any individual application will be examined or decided.

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 2115
1,257 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

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

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 81%
DISPOSITION1038 / 172 / 47allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.8 moart unit avg 25.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.2 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness80% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness46%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW84%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 193 decided applications with an interview and 1,017 without.

ART UNIT 2116
160 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION147 / 13 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.8 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28.1 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility29% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)81%
§103 — Obviousness64% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness35%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW92%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 16 decided applications with an interview and 144 without.

ART UNIT 2121
50 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

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

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION47 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.4 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.9 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility32% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness82% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness21%
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Vincent Huy Tran

  • What is Vincent Huy Tran's overall allowance rate?
    87% on 1,420 decided applications pooled across his three art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Three art units: 2115, 2116, and 2121, all within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • What is the range of allowance rates across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 86% to 94% across the three art units, reflecting differences in application composition within each unit.
◈ 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 Vincent Huy Tran 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: 1,467 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