LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ANDREA NATAE LONG
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Andrea Natae Long

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 393 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2022
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Andrea Natae Long has allowed 201 of 393 decided applications (51%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

51% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2175 · 52%AU 2176 · 48%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Andrea Natae Long has a pooled public record of 393 disposed applications across 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of these decided applications, 201 were allowed and 192 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 51%. The allowance rate across the examiner's art units ranges from 48% to 52%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units and reflects the historical share of applications that received allowances among all decided cases.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines data across multiple art units, so the overall allowance rate is a weighted aggregate. This 51% figure describes past outcomes across all decided applications and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Variation exists across individual art units (48%–52%), so applicants reviewing detailed per-art-unit records may encounter different historical rates depending on the specific art unit handling their case.

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 2175
347 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION179 / 168 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.7 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.2 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility35% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)64%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW61%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW46%+15 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 119 decided applications with an interview and 228 without.

ART UNIT 2176
46 APPS · 48% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

48% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION22 / 24 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION36.7 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY50.2 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Andrea Natae Long

  • What is Andrea Natae Long's overall allowance rate?
    51% across 393 decided applications in TC 2100. This is the share of applications that were allowed among all disposed (decided) cases.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    2 art units (2175 and 2176), both within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 48% to 52% across the examiner's art units. Detailed per-art-unit records are available separately.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    This pooled figure is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Actual results depend on the claims, prior art, and the specific art unit assigned.
◈ 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 Andrea Natae Long 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: 393 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