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

Examiner Tongoc Tran

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 508 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2023
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
80%vs 76% art-unit average+4 pts
higher than about 42% of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 41 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 38 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Tongoc Tran has allowed 404 of 508 decided applications.

404 allowed
104 abandoned
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Tongoc Tran's public record spans one art unit in Technology Center 2400. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner issued allowances at an 80% rate. This figure represents the share of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined), excluding pending cases. The 80% allowance rate is the examiner's pooled record across all art units under review.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates data across the examiner's art units and reflects past decisions on applications in Technology Center 2400. The 80% allowance rate describes historical outcomes, not a prediction about any specific application. Aggregate figures mask variation across individual art units and technology areas. Each application presents unique facts and claims; past rates do not forecast the outcome of any particular case.

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 2434
508 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

80%
higher than about 42% of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 41 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 38 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition508 decided applications

404 allowed
104 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 23.3mo
disposed 40.1mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 26.5 mo, disposed 41.8 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 39
8%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
36%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 86
88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
10%

Interview benefit

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

without
75%
+17 pts
with
92%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 145 decided applications with an interview and 363 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tongoc Tran

  • What is Examiner Tran's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner issued allowances at an 80% rate among all decided applications, pooled across art units.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    This pooled profile spans one art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the 80% figure mean?
    It is the percentage of decided applications (allowed and abandoned) that resulted in allowance. Pending applications are excluded. This is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • Does this rate apply to my application?
    No. This pooled rate describes past decisions across multiple art units and applications. Individual application outcomes depend on unique facts, claims, and prior art, and cannot be predicted from historical aggregates.
◈ 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.

Lynch LLP's patent practiceApplication 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 Tongoc Tran 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: 508 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