LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/DONALD L LAWSON
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Donald L Lawson

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 70 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2011
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Donald L Lawson has allowed 46 of 70 decided applications (66%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

66% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2158 · 65%AU 2154 · 83%AU 2169 · 50%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Donald L Lawson maintains a public record across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 70 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 46 and abandoned 24, yielding an allowance rate of 66%. This rate reflects the ratio of allowed to decided applications in the pooled record and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application. The record spans multiple art units, each of which may exhibit distinct examination patterns documented separately.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates examination outcomes across 3 art units within TC 2100. The allowance rate of 66% describes past dispositions and reflects the examiner's historical allowed-to-decided ratio. Pooled figures mask art-unit-specific variation and are correlational, not predictive. Individual art-unit records are available separately and may differ materially from this aggregate. Pooled data describes what occurred; it is not a forecast of any pending or future application.

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 2158
46 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 48%
DISPOSITION30 / 16 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.1 moart unit avg 23.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.7 moart unit avg 49.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility100% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)33%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 46 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2154
12 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION10 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.4 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47.7 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility75% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 12 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2169
12 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION6 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.3 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.9 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Donald L Lawson

  • What is Donald L Lawson's overall allowance rate?
    66% across 70 disposed applications (46 allowed, 24 abandoned). This is a pooled figure across 3 art units and reflects the ratio of allowed to decided applications in the examiner's historical record.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    3 art units (2154, 2158, 2169), all within Technology Center 2100. This record is pooled across all three.
  • Does the 66% rate apply to my application?
    No. The 66% rate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction for any specific application. Individual outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and examination response. Art-unit-specific rates may differ from this aggregate.
  • What subject matter does this examiner cover?
    Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
◈ 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 Donald L Lawson 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: 70 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