Skip to main content

Life Sciences is now live. See how →

Patent Examiner Nizal S. Chandrakumar

Art Unit 1625 · Heterocyclic Drug Compounds & Medicinal Chemistry · Tech Center 1600 · 474 applications filed 2021–2026

⚑ Hard · harder than 67% of examiners● Free examiner data

Nizal S. Chandrakumar is a USPTO patent examiner in Art Unit 1625 (Heterocyclic Drug Compounds & Medicinal Chemistry) with 474 applications from filing years 2021–2026. Examiner Chandrakumar's allowance rate is 75.3%, below the 82.7% USPTO average for applications filed in the same years. The examiner ranks harder than 67% of examiners. In 2022, decided applications with an examiner interview were allowed 55.6 percentage points more often than those without.

Draft a response to Examiner ChandrakumarSee the strategy data ↓

Data through October 2026 from USPTO Patent Center (formerly PAIR) · Methodology

Overview

Free
Difficulty · Hard
harder than 67% of examiners
Easier67th percentileHarder
Allowance rate vs peers
Examiner Chandrakumar75.3%
Art Unit 162570.5%
USPTO average82.7%
Allowance rate
75.3%
▼ USPTO avg 82.7%
Applications
474
filing years 2021–2026
First-action allowance
31.6%
patented with no rejection
Abandoned
17.3%
share of applications
Avg office actions
1.2
USPTO avg 1.3
Days to first OA
693
▲ USPTO 614
RCE rate
19.2%
USPTO 19.9%
Interview rate
59.5%
USPTO 27.6%

Examiner details

  • Art unit1625 · Heterocyclic Drug Compounds & Medicinal Chemistry
  • Title / gradePrimary Patent Examiner · GS-14
  • Service20 years
  • Phone(571) 272-6202
  • Email[email protected]
  • LocationAlexandria, VA 22314
  • In USPTO recordsCHANDRAKUMAR, NIZAL S
Full signatory authority

Examiner Chandrakumar can allow an application without a supervisory sign-off.

Examines (USPC classes)
514 · Drug, Bio-Affecting & Body Treating Compositions546 · Organic Compounds: Heterocyclic Nitrogen (Class 532-570 Series)549 · Organic Compounds: Heterocyclic Oxygen (Class 532-570 Series)

How to improve your odds with Examiner Chandrakumar

  • The data favors an interview. Interviewed cases were allowed more often in all 4 measured years, by 15.7 to 55.6 points.
  • Plan for the timeline. First office action averages 693 days vs the 614-day USPTO norm.
  • Expect a §112. Definiteness & disclosure is the most-issued rejection (170), and applicants overcame it 65.4% of the time.
  • The data favors an RCE here. Cases with an RCE were allowed more often in all 3 measured years, by 3.2 to 12.8 points.

Historical patterns from this examiner's past cases, shown for general information. This is not legal advice and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Decisions about interviews, RCEs, and claim strategy should be made with a licensed patent attorney or agent.

Rejection patterns & how they get overcome

Free
§102 Novelty21 issued · 86.7% overcome
§103 Obviousness163 issued · 56.8% overcome
§112 Definiteness & disclosure170 issued · 65.4% overcome
How applicants traverse §112 rejections🔒 Members

Of the 44 winning responses to Examiner Chandrakumar's §112 rejections that Boundly has classified, 30 (68%) amended the claims and argued, 8 amended without arguing, and 6 argued without amending. Each winning response, with its arguments and claim amendments, is in the file wrapper.

Read the winning §112 argumentsFull REMARKS, amendments, claim trees & redlines from the file wrappers
Start free

Just got an office action from Examiner Chandrakumar?

Draft your response with Examiner Chandrakumar's record and Art Unit 1625's history in view, including the rejection patterns, the interview record, and the arguments that have overcome them. See the office action response workflow.

Open AI Studio free →

RCE behavior

Allowance after a Request for Continued Examination versus without one, per year. Use it to judge whether an RCE is worth the cost in front of Examiner Chandrakumar.

YearRCE rateAllowance w/ RCEAllowance w/oDelta
202316.4%75.0%71.8%+3.2pp
202227.3%85.2%72.4%+12.8pp
202122.3%80.0%74.4%+5.6pp

Recent outcomes

Free🔒 Case detail for members
App #TitleOutcomeOAsArguments & redline
18/043649Agonists of Stimulator of Interferon Genes StingPatented1🔒 View
18/850955MALT1 Modulators and Uses ThereofPatented0🔒 View
18/867252Improved Synthetic Methods for Making LactonesAbandoned2🔒 View
18/233121Potassium Channel ModulatorsAbandoned0🔒 View
See all 474 applications with full file-wrapper detailOffice action text, attorney arguments, amendments & claim-by-claim track changes
Start free

Art Unit 1625 technology

Heterocyclic compoundsMedicinal chemistryDrug compoundsOrganic synthesisTop CPC C07D · A61K · C07C
About this examiner. Nizal S. Chandrakumar examines in Art Unit 1625 (Heterocyclic Drug Compounds & Medicinal Chemistry, Tech Center 1600). The art unit's docket includes heterocyclic compounds, medicinal chemistry, drug compounds, and organic synthesis. Working on compound or antibody claims? See Life Sciences in AI Studio.

Frequently asked questions

What is Examiner Nizal S. Chandrakumar's allowance rate?
Examiner Chandrakumar's allowance rate is 75.3%, compared with 82.7% across the USPTO and 70.5% in Art Unit 1625 for applications filed in the same years. That rate ranks Examiner Chandrakumar harder than 67% of examiners.
Is Examiner Chandrakumar a hard examiner?
Somewhat. Examiner Chandrakumar ranks harder than 67% of examiners, in the 67th difficulty percentile (hard). Examiner Chandrakumar has a 75.3% allowance rate versus 82.7% across the USPTO and 70.5% in Art Unit 1625, 1.2 office actions per application versus 1.3, and an RCE rate of 19.2% versus 19.9% across the USPTO, for applications filed in the same years.
Do examiner interviews help with Examiner Chandrakumar?
In this examiner's record, yes. Decided applications with an interview were allowed more often in each of the 4 measured years, by 15.7 to 55.6 percentage points. In 2022, 87.6% of decided applications with an interview were allowed, versus 32.0% of those without.
What is Examiner Chandrakumar's most common rejection?
§112 definiteness & disclosure, issued 170 times in the data. Applicants overcame it 65.4% of the time. Of the 44 winning responses Boundly has classified, 30 amended the claims and argued.
Is an RCE worth filing with Examiner Chandrakumar?
In this examiner's record, yes. Decided applications with an RCE were allowed more often in each of the 3 measured years, by 3.2 to 12.8 percentage points. In 2022, 85.2% of decided applications with an RCE were allowed, versus 72.4% of those without one.
How long until the first office action from Examiner Chandrakumar?
About 693 days on average, versus 614 days across the USPTO for applications filed in the same years.
How do I contact Examiner Nizal S. Chandrakumar?
Examiner Chandrakumar can be reached by phone at (571) 272-6202 or by email at [email protected]. The examiner's direct line is also listed at the end of the examiner's office actions.

Put Examiner Chandrakumar's data to work on your next response.

Full file-wrapper detail, winning arguments, and AI-assisted drafting in one workspace.

Start free
Statistics are computed by Boundly Prosecution Intel from USPTO Patent Center (formerly PAIR) file wrappers for filing years 2021–2026, refreshed regularly. Allowance rate (sometimes called grant rate) is the share of disposed applications that issued as patents. Office actions here are non-final and final rejections, so restriction requirements and allowances are not counted. USPTO benchmarks are weighted to each examiner's mix of filing years, and art-unit benchmarks to the art units and filing years of the examiner's own applications, so they compare like for like. The difficulty percentile ranks examiners, each counted once, so it can point the other way from the USPTO average, which counts applications. See how each number is computed. The year-by-year interview and RCE tables show up to four recent filing years, leaving out the newest one and any year with fewer than ten applications or five decided applications on either side. Historical data is provided for informational purposes only. Past examiner behavior does not guarantee future outcomes, and nothing here is legal advice or a substitute for advice from a licensed patent attorney or agent. Are you Nizal S. Chandrakumar, or see an error? Request a correction.