LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/BARBARA HENRY LEVEL
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Barbara Henry Level

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 377 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 Barbara Henry Level has allowed 279 of 377 decided applications (74%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

74% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2144 · 71%AU 2142 · 80%AU 2175 · 78%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Barbara Henry Level maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 377 disposed applications, 279 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 74%. The allowance rate ranges from 71% to 80% across the examiner's art units. This pooled figure reflects the aggregate record and does not represent a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's decisions across multiple art units. The overall allowance rate is calculated from all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) within that set, excluding pending cases. This aggregate statistic describes past disposition patterns and is correlational only—it does not predict outcomes on any individual application or reflect how decisions in one art unit influence another.

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
248 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE
71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION176 / 72 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.9 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility52% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)88%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness61%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW79%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW59%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 146 decided applications with an interview and 102 without.

ART UNIT 2142
133 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION82 / 20 / 31allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.9 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.9 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility80% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness74% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness80%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW66%+28 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 52 decided applications with an interview and 50 without.

ART UNIT 2175
27 APPS · 78% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

78% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION21 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.9 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.4 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility44% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)96%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness64%

Based on 27 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Barbara Henry Level

  • What is Barbara Henry Level's overall allowance rate?
    74% of 377 disposed applications were allowed.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    The record spans 3 art units: 2142, 2144, and 2175.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across her art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 71% to 80% across these art units.
  • What does this pooled figure represent?
    This is an aggregate statistic of past dispositions 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 Barbara Henry Level 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: 408 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