LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ARACELIS RUIZ
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Aracelis Ruiz

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,028 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 Aracelis Ruiz has allowed 911 of 1,028 decided applications (89%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

89% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2139 · 94%AU 2189 · 77%AU 2113 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Aracelis Ruiz has a public record of 1,074 total applications across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 1,028 disposed applications, 911 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 89%. This rate reflects decided cases (allowed and abandoned combined) across the pooled art units. Allowance rates vary across her art units, ranging from 77% to 94%. The examiner's record spans art units 2113, 2139, and 2189.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates the examiner's work across three separate art units in TC 2100. The pooled allowance rate of 89% describes her past dispositions on decided applications and does not predict outcomes in any specific case. Because different art units may have different application profiles, the 77%–94% range shows variation in allowance rates across these units. Per-art-unit detail appears in a separate section of this profile.

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 2139
771 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION679 / 46 / 46allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16 moart unit avg 24 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.8 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)83%
§103 — Obviousness78% · art unit 80%
§112 — Written description & definiteness33%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW92%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 204 decided applications with an interview and 521 without.

ART UNIT 2189
302 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

77% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 77%
DISPOSITION232 / 70 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47.1 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)39%
§103 — Obviousness84% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness19%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW73%+19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 53 decided applications with an interview and 249 without.

ART UNIT 2113
1 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 79%
DISPOSITION0 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION12.7 moart unit avg 21.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY19 moart unit avg 32.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 37%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 66%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 1 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Aracelis Ruiz

  • What is Examiner Ruiz's overall allowance rate?
    89% across 1,028 disposed applications pooled from all her art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Three art units (2113, 2139, 2189) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across her art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 77% to 94% across the three art units where she has a substantial record.
  • What does the pooled rate mean for my application?
    The pooled rate describes her past record on decided cases and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Aracelis Ruiz 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: 1,074 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