LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/DJENANE M BAYARD
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Djenane M Bayard

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 99 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT

Examiner Djenane M Bayard has allowed 53 of 99 decided applications (54%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

54% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Djenane M Bayard maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 99 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 53 and abandoned 46, yielding an allowance rate of 54%. The examiner's record spans one art unit. This pooled allowance rate reflects the overall share of decided applications that issued as patents, aggregated across the examiner's assigned art units. The figure represents past dispositions and does not indicate the outcome of any individual pending application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates decisions across one art unit within TC 2100. The allowance rate (54%) is a historical average of allowed applications divided by all decided applications—allowed plus abandoned—and excludes pending cases. Pooled figures describe the examiner's past record in aggregate form. Aggregate allowance rates are not predictions of outcomes on any specific application and do not account for differences in application complexity, claim scope, or prior-art strength.

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 2141
99 APPS · 54% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

54% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION53 / 46 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION38.2 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY56.6 moart unit avg 47.1 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW55%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW53%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 33 decided applications with an interview and 66 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Djenane M Bayard

  • What is Examiner Bayard's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 54%, based on 99 disposed applications (53 allowed, 46 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    The record spans one art unit within Technology Center 2100, aggregated into a single pooled profile.
  • What does the allowance rate tell me about my application?
    The allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual results depend on claim scope, prior art, and examiner analysis of the particular invention.
◈ 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 Djenane M Bayard 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: 99 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