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

Examiner Zarni Maung

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 828 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2018
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
94%vs 65% art-unit average+29 pts
higher than about 94% of the 35 examiners with published rates in art unit 2451
AU avg 65%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 35 examiners with published rates in art unit 2451; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 36 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 35 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Zarni Maung has allowed 777 of 828 decided applications.

777 allowed
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Zarni Maung's public record in Technology Center 2400 spans one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the allowance rate is 94%, meaning that of applications with final dispositions (allowed or abandoned), 94% were allowed. This figure aggregates the examiner's pooled record and describes past outcomes in decided cases. The allowance rate does not predict the outcome of any individual application.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across all art units assigned to an examiner and represents historical outcomes in closed applications. The overall allowance rate reflects the share of allowed applications among those with final dispositions. Aggregate figures describe past performance and are not predictions of any specific application's outcome. Individual applications may vary based on claim scope, prior art, and statutory requirements.

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 2451
828 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

94%
higher than about 94% of the 35 examiners with published rates in art unit 2451
AU avg 65%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 35 examiners with published rates in art unit 2451; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 36 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 35 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition828 decided applications

777 allowed
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 22.7mo
disposed 34mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 24.8 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 43
60%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
48%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 83
36%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
21%

Interview benefit

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

without
93%
+4 pts
with
97%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 102 decided applications with an interview and 726 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Zarni Maung

  • What is Zarni Maung's allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 94% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This means 94% of applications with final dispositions were allowed.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Zarni Maung's public record covers one art unit. The pooled figures on this page aggregate the examiner's record across that unit.
  • Does this allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The allowance rate describes past decided applications and is not a prediction of any individual application's fate. Each application depends on claim language, prior art, and statutory compliance.
  • What technology does this examiner handle?
    This examiner works in Technology Center 2400. Specific art-unit assignments and subject-matter details appear in the separate art-unit section of this page.
◈ 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 Zarni Maung 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: 828 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