Examiner Volvick Derose has allowed 655 of 717 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Volvick Derose maintains a public record spanning four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 717 decided applications, the allowance rate is 91%, meaning 655 applications were allowed and 62 were abandoned. The examiner's allowance rate across individual art units ranges from 74% to 99%. This pooled figure aggregates decisions made across the examiner's full art-unit portfolio and describes the historical record without predicting outcomes on any specific application.
A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, creating an overall snapshot of an examiner's allowance patterns. The aggregate allowance rate describes past decisions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual art units within an examiner's portfolio often have different allowance rates; the range reflects this variation. Pooled statistics are useful for understanding broad patterns but do not account for differences in application complexity, rejection grounds, or amendment history across individual cases.
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 →
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.
Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 173 decided applications with an interview and 244 without.
Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 55 decided applications with an interview and 88 without.
Primarily examines control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 23 decided applications with an interview and 65 without.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 24 decided applications with an interview and 45 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Volvick Derose 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: 748 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