LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/KHALID M ALMAGHAYREH
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Khalid M Almaghayreh

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 307 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
85%vs 71% art-unit average+14 pts
higher than about 73% of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2492
AU avg 71%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2492; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 31 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 30 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Khalid M Almaghayreh has allowed 262 of 307 decided applications.

262 allowed
45 abandoned
Plus 27 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Khalid M Almaghayreh maintains a record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 85%. This rate reflects the share of applications that were allowed among all decided cases (allowed and abandoned applications pooled together). The public record encompasses applications within a single art unit, and the figures presented describe the examiner's historical record without prediction or characterization of any future application.

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's record across all art units in which they work. The allowance rate and other pooled figures describe what occurred in the examiner's past decided applications and do not constitute a prediction about the outcome of any specific pending case. Pooled statistics represent an average across different subject areas and application types; individual applications may vary based on their own facts, prior art, and claims.

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 2492
334 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

85%
higher than about 73% of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2492
AU avg 71%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2492; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 31 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 30 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition307 decided applications

262 allowed
45 abandoned
Plus 27 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19.3mo
disposed 31.4mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.3 mo, disposed 40.9 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 42
29%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
92%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 83
88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
73%

Interview benefit

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

without
64%
+29 pts
with
93%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 223 decided applications with an interview and 84 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Khalid M Almaghayreh

  • What is Khalid M Almaghayreh's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate across hundreds of decided applications is 85%. This represents the percentage of applications allowed among all decided cases (allowed plus abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The examiner's record covers one art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • Does this allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The allowance rate describes the examiner's historical record in decided cases and is not a prediction of any specific pending application's outcome.
  • What technology center is this examiner in?
    The examiner works in Technology Center 2400. The pooled record spans all art units assigned to this examiner within that center.
◈ 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.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.PTAB trials and patent appealsAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Building a patent portfolioHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Booking a consultationFree 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 Khalid M Almaghayreh 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: 334 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