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

Examiner Viral S Lakhia

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 801 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
90%vs 73% art-unit average+17 pts
higher than about 67% of the 46 examiners with published rates in art unit 2431
AU avg 73%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 46 examiners with published rates in art unit 2431; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 52 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 46 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Viral S Lakhia has allowed 724 of 801 decided applications.

724 allowed
Plus 19 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Viral S Lakhia maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 90%. This figure represents the share of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned) in the examiner's pooled record. The allowance rate is calculated from decided cases only; pending applications are excluded. This public record reflects past dispositions and does not predict outcomes for any individual application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates applications across all art units under this examiner's jurisdiction. The 90% allowance rate describes historical dispositions—applications that were allowed or abandoned—and represents a snapshot of past cases. Pooled figures mask variation across different art units and technologies within TC 2400. The rate is correlational data, not predictive; it does not indicate how any specific application will be examined or decided.

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 2431
820 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

90%
higher than about 67% of the 46 examiners with published rates in art unit 2431
AU avg 73%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 46 examiners with published rates in art unit 2431; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 52 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 46 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition801 decided applications

724 allowed
Plus 19 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 20.9mo
disposed 32mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 20.9 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 40
35%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
36%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 81
86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
27%

Interview benefit

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

without
81%
+15 pts
with
96%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 506 decided applications with an interview and 295 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Viral S Lakhia

  • What is Viral S Lakhia's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 90% across hundreds of decided applications in the pooled record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record spans one art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • Does this pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's disposition. Individual cases vary by technology, claims, prior art, and examination history.
  • What does 'decided applications' mean?
    Decided applications include those that were allowed or abandoned. Pending applications are excluded from the allowance-rate calculation.
◈ 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 Viral S Lakhia 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: 820 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