LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/CHRISTOPHER E EVERETT
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Christopher E Everett

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 899 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 Christopher E Everett has allowed 761 of 899 decided applications (85%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

85% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2116 · 89%AU 2121 · 75%AU 2117 · 93%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Christopher E Everett's pooled record across Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spans 3 art units with 943 total applications. Of 899 disposed applications, 761 were allowed, yielding an 85% allowance rate. The allowance rate ranges from 75% to 93% across these art units. This record aggregates outcomes from multiple art-unit dockets and reflects past dispositions only; it is not a prediction of any specific pending application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled examiner record aggregates data across multiple art units, obscuring individual unit performance. The overall allowance rate describes historical disposition rates on decided applications and does not predict outcomes on any single case. Allowance-rate ranges show variation across the examiner's art units but do not identify which rate applies to which unit—that detail appears in per-art-unit sections. Pooled figures are correlational, not causal.

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 2116
479 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION428 / 51 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.1 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY26.5 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility26% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)94%
§103 — Obviousness79% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW85%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 199 decided applications with an interview and 280 without.

ART UNIT 2121
325 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE

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

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION245 / 80 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.5 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.5 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)81%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness33%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW52%+40 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 193 decided applications with an interview and 132 without.

ART UNIT 2117
139 APPS · 93% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

93% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 74%
DISPOSITION88 / 7 / 44allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.1 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.2 moart unit avg 33.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)97%
§103 — Obviousness83% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness47%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 42 decided applications with an interview and 53 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Christopher E Everett

  • What is Christopher E Everett's allowance rate?
    85%, based on 761 allowed applications out of 899 disposed applications in his pooled record across TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Three art units (2116, 2117, 2121) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 75% to 93% across the examiner's art units. Specific rates for each unit appear in the per-art-unit section of this page.
  • Is this rate a prediction for my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific pending application.
◈ 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 Christopher E Everett 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: 943 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