LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/EMERSON C PUENTE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Emerson C Puente

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 310 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 Emerson C Puente has allowed 227 of 310 decided applications (73%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

73% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2113 · 79%AU 2196 · 34%AU 2187 · 53%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Emerson C Puente has a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 310 disposed applications, the overall allowance rate is 73%, meaning 227 applications were allowed and 83 abandoned. The allowance rate varies across the three art units, ranging from 34% to 79%. This pooled figure reflects the aggregate record and does not describe any single art unit in isolation.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates three separate art units within TC 2100, each potentially handling distinct subject areas. The pooled allowance rate of 73% is a historical summary across all three units combined and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Understanding that different art units may have different allowance rates is important when interpreting aggregate statistics. The range shown reflects variation among the individual units.

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 2113
266 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring.

79% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 79%
DISPOSITION209 / 57 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.7 moart unit avg 21.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.8 moart unit avg 32.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 37%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)38%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 66%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW64%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW83%-19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 64 decided applications with an interview and 202 without.

ART UNIT 2196
29 APPS · 34% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines program control and execution.

34% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION10 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.9 moart unit avg 27.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.2 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)88%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness69%

Based on 29 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2187
23 APPS · 53% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

53% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION8 / 7 / 8allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.5 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY51 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)96%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness74%

Based on 23 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Emerson C Puente

  • What is Examiner Puente's overall allowance rate?
    The overall allowance rate across all three art units is 73%, calculated from 227 allowed applications out of 310 disposed applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Examiner Puente has a public record across three art units (2113, 2187, 2196) in TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 34% to 79% across the three art units, indicating variation in disposal patterns among the different art units.
◈ 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 Emerson C Puente 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: 318 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