Examiner Aida Z Tessema has allowed 53 of 78 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Aida Z Tessema maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 78 disposed applications in art unit 2157, the examiner allowed 53 and abandoned 25. The allowance rate stands at 68% of decided applications. This pooled record reflects outcomes across a single art unit in TC 2100. The figures presented are historical outcomes and do not constitute predictions for any individual application.
This record aggregates examination outcomes across one art unit within TC 2100. The 68% allowance rate describes past dispositions and reflects the proportion of allowed applications among all decided cases—both allowances and abandonments combined. Pooled figures from multiple decisions provide context about the examiner's historical record but are not predictions about how any specific application will be examined or disposed.
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 →
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.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 38 decided applications with an interview and 40 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Aida Z Tessema has a public record within Technology Center 2100. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated June 25, 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: 78 applications.
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