LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/EDWARD J DUDEK JR
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Edward J Dudek Jr

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,269 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 Edward J Dudek Jr has allowed 1,138 of 1,269 decided applications (90%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

90% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2136 · 92%AU 2186 · 81%AU 2132 · 99%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Edward J Dudek Jr maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 1,269 disposed applications, his allowance rate is 90%, computed from 1,138 allowed applications and 131 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 81% to 99% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes across different subject areas within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates his record across all three art units and does not represent a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled examiner record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units and reflects historical disposal data only. The allowance rate shown—90% here—is a backward-looking statistic of applications already decided, not a forecast of how any future or pending application will be examined. Different art units within the same technology center may produce different allowance rates. Pooled figures mask that variation; per-art-unit detail is available separately.

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 2136
751 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer.

92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 60%
DISPOSITION690 / 61 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.5 moart unit avg 27.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY26.4 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility11% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)84%
§103 — Obviousness72% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW91%+3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 209 decided applications with an interview and 542 without.

ART UNIT 2186
363 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION294 / 69 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.8 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.1 moart unit avg 35 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)49%
§103 — Obviousness76% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness32%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW80%+8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 58 decided applications with an interview and 305 without.

ART UNIT 2132
194 APPS · 99% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

99% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION154 / 1 / 39allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.6 moart unit avg 27.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY22.6 moart unit avg 41 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility18% · art unit 21%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)87%
§103 — Obviousness66% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW99%+1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 45 decided applications with an interview and 110 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Edward J Dudek Jr

  • What is Edward J Dudek Jr's overall allowance rate?
    His allowance rate is 90%, based on 1,269 disposed applications (1,138 allowed and 131 abandoned). This is a historical statistic and is not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Edward J Dudek Jr has a public record across 3 art units (2132, 2136, 2186), all within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 81% to 99% across these art units. The pooled 90% figure masks these differences; per-art-unit breakdowns are provided separately.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    This pooled statistic describes past dispositions across multiple art units and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and examination of the particular 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 Edward J Dudek Jr 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: 1,308 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