LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/MOHAMMAD W REZA
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Mohammad W Reza

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 811 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION AUG 2024
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
86%vs 70% art-unit average+16 pts
higher than about 73% of the 37 examiners with published rates in art unit 2436
AU avg 70%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 37 examiners with published rates in art unit 2436; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 38 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 37 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Mohammad W Reza has allowed 696 of 811 decided applications.

696 allowed
115 abandoned
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Mohammad W Reza's public record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 86%, measured as a percentage of applications that were either allowed or abandoned. This figure represents the pooled outcome across all art units under this examiner's jurisdiction and describes the historical record of dispositions in decided cases.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across all art units under the examiner's authority. The allowance rate reflects past decisions on applications that reached final disposition—allowed or abandoned—and does not include pending applications. Aggregate historical rates describe the examiner's prior decisions and are not predictions of outcomes on any individual application.

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 2436
811 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

86%
higher than about 73% of the 37 examiners with published rates in art unit 2436
AU avg 70%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 37 examiners with published rates in art unit 2436; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 38 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 37 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition811 decided applications

696 allowed
115 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 21.1mo
disposed 34.4mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 27 mo, disposed 43.5 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 48
45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
77%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
94%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
34%

Interview benefit

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

without
83%
+11 pts
with
94%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 199 decided applications with an interview and 612 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Mohammad W Reza

  • What is Mohammad W Reza's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 86%, based on decided applications (allowed or abandoned) pooled across all art units. This figure reflects historical dispositions and is not a prediction for any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Mohammad W Reza's public record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the pooled record mean?
    The pooled record combines outcomes across all art units under the examiner's jurisdiction. It describes the examiner's historical record and does not predict outcomes on any individual pending application.
◈ 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.

Drafting and prosecuting patent applicationsApplication 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 Mohammad W Reza 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: 811 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