LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ANTONIO J CAIADO
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Antonio J Caiado

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 194 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION MAY 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Antonio J Caiado has allowed 136 of 194 decided applications (70%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

70% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2164 · 66%AU 2168 · 75%AU 2157 · 57%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Antonio J Caiado maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 194 decided applications, the allowance rate stands at 70%. This aggregate figure pools outcomes from art units 2157, 2164, and 2168. The allowance rate ranges from 66% to 75% across these art units, reflecting variation in the examiner's record within the technology center. The record encompasses 221 total applications, of which 136 were allowed and 58 were abandoned.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates applications across multiple art units and represents historical dispositions only. An aggregate allowance rate describes the examiner's past record across all covered art units combined and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Variations in allowance rate across individual art units reflect differences in application complexity, subject matter, or other factors within TC 2100. Historical statistics do not forecast results in any pending or future matter.

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 2164
125 APPS · 66% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

66% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION65 / 33 / 27allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION14.2 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility74% · art unit 58%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness60%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW78%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW40%+38 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 68 decided applications with an interview and 30 without.

ART UNIT 2168
89 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION67 / 22 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.8 moart unit avg 43.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility80% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)99%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness70%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW31%+66 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 60 decided applications with an interview and 29 without.

ART UNIT 2157
7 APPS · 57% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

57% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION4 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.2 moart unit avg 28 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28.4 moart unit avg 46.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility43% · art unit 48%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness86%

Based on 7 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Antonio J Caiado

  • What is Antonio J Caiado's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 70%, calculated over 194 decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined) pooled across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record spans 3 art units within TC 2100: art units 2157, 2164, and 2168.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 66% to 75% across the examiner's art units, indicating variation in the record within TC 2100.
  • What do these statistics mean for my application?
    Historical statistics describe an examiner's past record and are not predictions of any specific application's outcome. Each application is examined individually on its merits.
◈ 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 Antonio J Caiado 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: 221 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