LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ALEKSEY OLSHANNIKOV
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Aleksey Olshannikov

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 359 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Aleksey Olshannikov has allowed 207 of 359 decided applications (58%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

58% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2142 · 37%AU 2118 · 75%AU 2145 · 75%AU 2144 · 80%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Aleksey Olshannikov maintains a public record across 4 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 359 disposed applications, 207 were allowed, yielding a 58% allowance rate. The examiner's record spans multiple subject areas within TC 2100, with allowance rates ranging from 37% to 75% across these art units. This pooled figure reflects the aggregate of decided cases and does not represent a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units within TC 2100. The pooled allowance rate describes the historical proportion of allowed applications among those decided and is calculated from the total disposed count. The range across art units reflects variation in allowance rates by specific art-unit subject matter. Pooled figures describe past record only and are not predictions about any specific application.

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 →

// BY ART UNIT

The record, art unit by 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 2142
166 APPS · 37% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

37% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION62 / 104 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.6 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.9 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility53% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)73%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness77%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW51%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW13%+38 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 106 decided applications with an interview and 60 without.

ART UNIT 2118
136 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE
75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION59 / 20 / 57allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.1 moart unit avg 22.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility27% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)20%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness49%
ART UNIT 2145
99 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION74 / 25 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION13.4 moart unit avg 26.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.1 moart unit avg 45.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility15% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)40%
§103 — Obviousness98% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness42%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW87%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW18%+69 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 82 decided applications with an interview and 17 without.

ART UNIT 2144
15 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION12 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION13.2 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.7 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility14% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)21%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness43%

Based on 15 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Aleksey Olshannikov

  • What is Aleksey Olshannikov's overall allowance rate?
    Of 359 disposed applications, 207 were allowed, for a 58% allowance rate. This figure is calculated from all decided cases pooled across the examiner's art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's record spans 4 art units (2118, 2142, 2144, 2145) within Technology Center 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 37% to 75% across these art units. Individual art-unit records are available in a separate detailed section of this page.
  • Does this pooled record predict the outcome of my application?
    No. Pooled figures describe historical record only and are not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Aleksey Olshannikov 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: 416 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