LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ANDRE PIERRE LOUIS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Andre Pierre Louis

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 868 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 Andre Pierre Louis has allowed 625 of 868 decided applications (72%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

72% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2123 · 63%AU 2187 · 83%AU 2127 · 81%AU 2146 · 78%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Andre Pierre Louis maintains a public record across four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 868 disposed applications, 625 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 72%. The examiner's work spans art units 2123, 2127, 2146, and 2187. Allowance rates across these art units range from 63% to 83%, reflecting variation in the composition and outcomes of applications handled within each unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units in TC 2100. The 72% allowance rate describes past dispositions and does not predict the outcome of any individual application. Because different art units handle different technologies and application volumes, the overall figure masks unit-level variation—shown here as a range of 63% to 83%. Pooled statistics describe historical performance; they are not forecasts for specific cases.

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 2123
414 APPS · 63% ALLOWANCE

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

63% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 51%
DISPOSITION260 / 154 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.9 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.8 moart unit avg 43.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility70% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)47%
§103 — Obviousness79% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness45%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW70%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW61%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 88 decided applications with an interview and 326 without.

ART UNIT 2187
177 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION109 / 22 / 46allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.4 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.5 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility76% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)28%
§103 — Obviousness65% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness48%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW87%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW79%+8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 63 decided applications with an interview and 68 without.

ART UNIT 2127
167 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

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

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION135 / 32 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.2 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.9 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility74% · art unit 51%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)39%
§103 — Obviousness77% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness61%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW89%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW68%+21 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 101 decided applications with an interview and 66 without.

ART UNIT 2146
156 APPS · 78% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

78% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 50%
DISPOSITION121 / 35 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.2 moart unit avg 32 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.7 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility72% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)40%
§103 — Obviousness70% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness66%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW81%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW73%+8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 70 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Andre Pierre Louis

  • What is Andre Pierre Louis's overall allowance rate?
    72% of 868 disposed applications were allowed. This figure aggregates outcomes across all art units and describes past record only, not future dispositions.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Four: art units 2123, 2127, 2146, and 2187, all within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 63% to 83%, reflecting differences in application composition and outcomes within each unit.
◈ 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 Andre Pierre Louis 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: 914 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