LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/CLINT A THATCHER
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Clint A Thatcher

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 450 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2025
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Clint A Thatcher has allowed 395 of 450 decided applications (88%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

88% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2191 · 85%AU 2197 · 99%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Clint A Thatcher maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 450 disposed applications, his allowance rate stands at 88%, representing 395 allowed applications and 55 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 85% to 99% across his art units, reflecting variation in the decided record within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across different art-unit portfolios and describes the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines outcomes from multiple art units into a single aggregate allowance rate. This figure reflects past dispositions across different subject areas within TC 2100 and is not predictive of any individual application's outcome. Variation exists across the examiner's art units, as shown by the reported range. Pooled data describes the overall historical record; application-specific results depend on claim scope, prior art, and examination details.

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 2191
365 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines software engineering, and error detection, correction, and monitoring.

85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 76%
DISPOSITION311 / 54 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION14.4 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.2 moart unit avg 41.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility44% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)93%
§103 — Obviousness73% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW83%+5 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 144 decided applications with an interview and 221 without.

ART UNIT 2197
85 APPS · 99% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution, and software engineering.

99% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION84 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION14.9 moart unit avg 26 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.8 moart unit avg 44.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility47% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)79%
§103 — Obviousness66% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW98%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 36 decided applications with an interview and 49 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Clint A Thatcher

  • What is Clint A Thatcher's overall allowance rate?
    88% across 450 disposed applications in TC 2100. This represents 395 allowed and 55 abandoned applications.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    2 art units (2191 and 2197), both within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 85% to 99% across the examiner's art units, indicating variation in the historical record within TC 2100.
  • Is this pooled rate predictive of my application?
    No. This aggregate record describes past dispositions only 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 Clint A Thatcher 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: 450 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