Examiner William Wong has allowed 126 of 424 decided applications (30%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner William Wong holds a public record across 6 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 424 disposed applications, his pooled allowance rate stands at 30%. His record spans art units 2141, 2144, 2172, 2176, 2178, and 2179. Among these art units, allowance rates range from 3% to 52%, reflecting variation in outcomes across different subject-matter areas within the technology center. Of the 466 total applications in his record, 126 were allowed and 298 were abandoned.
A pooled record aggregates results across multiple art units into a single overall figure. The 30% allowance rate describes the examiner's historical record on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The range (3% to 52%) shows that allowance rates differ among the art units covered. Applicants may review per-art-unit detail separately to see how outcomes vary by specific technology area.
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 artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 97 decided applications with an interview and 93 without.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 35 decided applications with an interview and 23 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 48 decided applications with an interview and 31 without.
Based on 31 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner William Wong 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: 466 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