LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ALEXANDER J KOSOWSKI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Alexander J Kosowski

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 287 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
79%vs 72% weighted peer average+7 pts

Examiner Alexander J Kosowski has allowed 227 of 287 decided applications in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

allowed227abandoned60pending0· pending excluded from the rate
The weighted peer average (72%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 14, 2026
AU 2125 · 78%AU 2128 · 87%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Alexander J Kosowski maintains a pooled allowance rate of 79% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His record spans 2 art units. The allowance rate ranges from 78% to 87% across these art units, reflecting variation in the composition of applications examined within each unit. This pooled figure represents the percentage of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined) across his record in this technology center.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This examiner's record is pooled across multiple art units within TC 2100, which means the overall allowance rate aggregates different examination areas and application types. The 79% figure describes the past record as a whole and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The range of 78% to 87% indicates that allowance rates differ among individual art units; applicants examining art-unit-specific records will find those figures in separate sections.

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 2125
242 APPS · 78% ALLOWANCE

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

78% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 75%
DISPOSITION188 / 54 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.1 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.6 moart unit avg 39 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW93%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW74%+19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 43 decided applications with an interview and 199 without.

ART UNIT 2128
45 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION39 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.8 moart unit avg 30 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.4 moart unit avg 46.5 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Alexander J Kosowski

  • What is Alexander J Kosowski's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 79%, calculated across hundreds of decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined) in Technology Center 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Kosowski's record spans 2 art units within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 78% to 87% across the art units in which he has a substantial record. Per-art-unit detail is provided separately.
  • Is the 79% figure a prediction for my application?
    No. This pooled allowance rate describes his historical record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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.Appeals and PTAB practiceAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.IP portfolio strategyHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Scheduling time with an attorneyFree 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 Alexander J Kosowski 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 July 14, 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: 287 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