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

Examiner Christopher J Raab

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 625 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Christopher J Raab has allowed 486 of 625 decided applications (78%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

78% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2156 · 80%AU 2154 · 53%AU 2166 · 46%AU 2169 · 33%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Christopher J Raab has a public record spanning 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 625 disposed applications, 486 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 78%. This rate reflects decided cases (allowed and abandoned applications combined); 139 applications were abandoned. The examiner's record aggregates work across multiple art units, and the pooled allowance rate describes historical disposition patterns rather than any prediction about individual applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's performance across multiple art units and technology areas. The overall allowance rate is a historical measure—a fraction of all decided applications—and does not constitute a prediction for any specific pending or future application. Different art units within TC 2100 may have distinct subject matter and examination patterns. Pooled figures serve as background context only and are not probative of any particular case outcome.

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 2156
615 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION469 / 119 / 27allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.1 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)77%
§103 — Obviousness82% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness34%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW84%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW75%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 283 decided applications with an interview and 305 without.

ART UNIT 2154
15 APPS · 53% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

53% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION8 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.2 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.5 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)0%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 15 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2166
13 APPS · 46% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

46% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION6 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30 moart unit avg 23.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.9 moart unit avg 45 mo
ART UNIT 2169
9 APPS · 33% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

33% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION3 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.1 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Christopher J Raab

  • What is Christopher J Raab's overall allowance rate?
    Across 625 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 78%. This figure represents allowed applications as a percentage of all decided cases (allowed plus abandoned), and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans 4 art units (2154, 2156, 2166, 2169) within Technology Center 2100. The pooled allowance rate aggregates performance across all four units and does not isolate results by individual art unit.
  • What is the difference between total applications and disposed applications?
    Total applications filed were 652; disposed (decided) applications numbered 625. The 78% allowance rate is calculated from the 625 decided cases only. Pending applications are excluded from the allowance-rate calculation.
  • How many applications were abandoned?
    139 applications were abandoned out of 625 disposed applications. Abandoned applications are included in the denominator used to calculate the allowance rate.
◈ 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 J Raab 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: 652 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