LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/BRIAN W WATHEN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Brian W Wathen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 609 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 Brian W Wathen has allowed 531 of 609 decided applications (87%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

87% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2194 · 80%AU 2198 · 96%AU 2151 · 92%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Brian W Wathen maintains a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 609 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 531, for an allowance rate of 87%. Across the three art units, allowance rates range from 80% to 96%. The record aggregates outcomes from distinct subject-matter groups within TC 2100 and describes historical disposal patterns only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record combines three separate art units into a single aggregate profile. The 87% allowance rate and the 80% to 96% range reflect past decisions across different examination groups and are historical summaries, not predictions of outcomes in any individual application. Pooled figures mask variation among art units; detailed per-unit records are available separately.

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 2194
313 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution.

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION251 / 62 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.5 moart unit avg 28 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.8 moart unit avg 43.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility45% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)56%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness70%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW73%+17 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 137 decided applications with an interview and 176 without.

ART UNIT 2198
170 APPS · 96% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution.

96% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 83%
DISPOSITION164 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.2 moart unit avg 25.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY23.4 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility27% · art unit 50%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)51%
§103 — Obviousness64% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness37%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW96%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 43 decided applications with an interview and 127 without.

ART UNIT 2151
154 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION116 / 10 / 28allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.7 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.6 moart unit avg 44.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility48% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)39%
§103 — Obviousness54% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+11 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 38 decided applications with an interview and 88 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Brian W Wathen

  • What is Brian W Wathen's overall allowance rate?
    87% across 609 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner work across?
    Three art units: 2151, 2194, and 2198.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the art units?
    Allowance rates range from 80% to 96% across the examiner's art units.
  • Does this allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The rate is a historical aggregate 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 Brian W Wathen 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: 637 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