LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/ASHIL S FARAHMAND
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Ashil S Farahmand

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 241 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION DEC 2017
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
79%vs 83% art-unit average4 pts
higher than about 27% of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472
AU avg 83%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 47 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 45 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Ashil S Farahmand has allowed 191 of 241 decided applications.

191 allowed
50 abandoned
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Ashil S Farahmand maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 across one art unit. Over hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 79%. This figure represents the percentage of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (those allowed and abandoned, with pending applications excluded). The 79% allowance rate is the examiner's pooled record across the assigned art unit and does not constitute a prediction for any specific application or prosecution path.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's decisions across all assigned art units within TC 2400. The allowance-rate figure describes historical outcomes across decided applications and reflects past record only. Pooled statistics do not predict outcomes in individual cases and do not account for variation in application complexity, claim scope, prior art, or examiner-applicant interactions on a case-by-case basis.

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 →

The record, art unit by art unit.1 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 2472
241 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

79%
higher than about 27% of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472
AU avg 83%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 47 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 45 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition241 decided applications

191 allowed
50 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 24.4mo
disposed 45.4mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.3 mo, disposed 35.1 mo.

Rejection groundsexaminer ● vs art-unit average ○

REJECTION RATE = SHARE OF THIS EXAMINER'S APPLICATIONS THAT DREW ≥1 OFFICE-ACTION REJECTION IN WHICH THE GROUND APPEARS

Grounds can co-occur, so the four don't sum to 100%. The art-unit figure is the unweighted mean across examiners in the art unit; §102 and §112 carry no art-unit benchmark.

§101 — Subject-matter eligibility
AU 22
23%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
69%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
74%

Interview benefit

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

without
66%
+29 pts
with
95%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 113 decided applications with an interview and 128 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ashil S Farahmand

  • What is Ashil S Farahmand's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 79% across hundreds of decided applications pooled across all art units in TC 2400. This represents the share of allowed applications among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Ashil S Farahmand's public record spans one art unit within Technology Center 2400.
  • Does this allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. This pooled historical rate does not predict any individual application's outcome. It reflects past decided applications only and does not account for specific claim elements, prior art, application details, or prosecution interactions.
  • What does the 79% allowance rate include?
    The 79% rate is calculated from decided applications (allowed and abandoned), excluding pending applications. It is the examiner's pooled record across all assigned art units.
◈ HOW LYNCH LLP CAN HELP

Where to go next.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. These are general resources about the firm's services — not advice about this examiner or any specific application.

Patent prosecution at Lynch LLPApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Work before the Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Planning a patent portfolio over timeHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.The firm's consultation optionsFree and paid consultation options across the firm's attorneys.
◈ 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 Ashil S Farahmand has a public record within Technology Center 2400. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated July 22, 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: 241 applications.

Rejection rates. Each §-rate is the share of this examiner's applications that drew at least one office-action rejection in which that statutory ground appears; applications with no rejection on record are excluded, and because grounds can co-occur the four do not sum to 100%. The art-unit figure beside each is the unweighted mean of the per-examiner rates across the art unit, published for §101 and §103 only. Beside the overall allowance rate we show a benchmark: for a single-art-unit examiner it is exactly that art unit's average, labeled “art-unit average”; for an examiner spanning several art units it is the “weighted peer average” — the per-art-unit averages, weighted by this examiner's application count in each — labeled distinctly because it is a blended figure, not any single art unit's average. Both are built from the same per-art-unit averages the panels show.

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