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

Examiner Asher Kells

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 797 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 Asher Kells has allowed 662 of 797 decided applications (83%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

83% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2144 · 84%AU 2171 · 92%AU 2178 · 60%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Asher Kells maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 797 disposed applications, 662 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 83%. The examiner's record spans multiple art units, with allowance rates ranging from 60% to 92% across these units. The pooled figure of 83% reflects outcomes across all three art units combined and does not represent performance in any single unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates the examiner's decisions across multiple art units. The 83% allowance rate describes past outcomes on 797 decided applications and is a historical summary, not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The range of 60% to 92% indicates variation among individual art units but does not identify which rate applies to which unit. Pooled data provides context for the examiner's overall record in TC 2100.

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 2144
512 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE
84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION428 / 84 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.2 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.6 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility41% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)86%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness64%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW83%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 206 decided applications with an interview and 306 without.

ART UNIT 2171
244 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE
92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION181 / 16 / 47allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19 moart unit avg 22 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY26.8 moart unit avg 37.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility40% · art unit 38%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)78%
§103 — Obviousness61% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness62%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW92%0 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 111 without.

ART UNIT 2178
88 APPS · 60% ALLOWANCE
60% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION53 / 35 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.1 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43.1 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility44% · art unit 36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness68%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW76%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW55%+21 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 21 decided applications with an interview and 67 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Asher Kells

  • What is Examiner Kells's overall allowance rate?
    83% of 797 disposed applications were allowed.
  • How many art units does Examiner Kells work in?
    Examiner Kells maintains a record across 3 art units (2144, 2171, 2178) in Technology Center 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across Examiner Kells's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 60% to 92% across the three art units. This range reflects historical variation but does not identify specific rates by unit.
  • Is the 83% rate a prediction for my application?
    No. The 83% allowance rate is a historical summary of past decisions 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 Asher Kells 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: 844 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