LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ANDREW TSUTOMU CHIUSANO
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Andrew Tsutomu Chiusano

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 412 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Andrew Tsutomu Chiusano has allowed 236 of 412 decided applications (57%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

57% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2174 · 52%AU 2144 · 77%AU 2176 · 65%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Andrew Tsutomu Chiusano's pooled public record spans 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 412 disposed applications, 236 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 57%. Across these art units, allowance rates range from 52% to 77%. This record aggregates activity across multiple art units with distinct subject matter and examiner workflow; the pooled figure represents a historical average of decided applications and does not forecast outcomes in any individual case.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's allowance history across multiple art units. The overall allowance rate (57% here) reflects the proportion of allowed applications among all decided cases—allowed plus abandoned—across all art units combined. This aggregate figure describes past decisions and is not a prediction for any specific application. Rates vary by art unit; the range (52% to 77%) reflects this variation but does not attribute any rate to a named unit.

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 2174
310 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE
52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION160 / 150 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.5 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.6 moart unit avg 42.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility36% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)88%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness60%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW41%+26 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 126 decided applications with an interview and 184 without.

ART UNIT 2144
120 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE
77% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION61 / 18 / 41allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43.9 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)90%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness34%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW67%+24 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 34 decided applications with an interview and 45 without.

ART UNIT 2176
23 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION15 / 8 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION12.5 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.4 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility22% · art unit 41%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)96%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness70%

Based on 23 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Andrew Tsutomu Chiusano

  • What is Andrew Tsutomu Chiusano's overall allowance rate?
    57%, based on 236 allowed applications out of 412 disposed (decided) applications across all art units in his record.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • What is the range of allowance rates across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 52% to 77% across the art units in which he has a substantial record. This range reflects variation among the units but does not identify which rate belongs to which unit.
  • Does this pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application. Outcomes depend on the claims, prior art, and examination of individual cases.
◈ 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 Andrew Tsutomu Chiusano 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: 453 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