LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ERIC T LOONAN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Eric T Loonan

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 453 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 Eric T Loonan has allowed 294 of 453 decided applications (65%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

65% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2137 · 74%AU 2189 · 65%AU 2131 · 48%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Eric T Loonan holds a public record of 488 total applications across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 453 disposed applications, 294 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 65%. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 48% to 74% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes among the different art-unit dockets. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's decisions across all three art units and describes historical performance only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's performance across multiple art units, combining different subject-matter dockets into one overall rate. The 65% allowance rate shown here is calculated from all decided applications across all three art units combined. This historical aggregate does not predict the outcome of any specific application, nor does it account for the particular characteristics of any individual filing or prosecution history.

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 2137
227 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE

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

74% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 68%
DISPOSITION142 / 50 / 35allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.4 moart unit avg 25.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.6 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility32% · art unit 25%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)86%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness72%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW81%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW59%+22 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 129 decided applications with an interview and 63 without.

ART UNIT 2189
153 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 77%
DISPOSITION100 / 53 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.2 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.5 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility26% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)58%
§103 — Obviousness64% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness57%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW54%+37 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 46 decided applications with an interview and 107 without.

ART UNIT 2131
108 APPS · 48% ALLOWANCE

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

48% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION52 / 56 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.5 moart unit avg 26.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54.2 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility28% · art unit 29%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)80%
§103 — Obviousness84% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness69%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW51%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW46%+5 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 49 decided applications with an interview and 59 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Eric T Loonan

  • What is Eric T Loonan's overall allowance rate?
    65%, based on 294 allowed applications out of 453 disposed applications pooled across all art units.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    Three art units: 2131, 2137, and 2189, all within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 48% to 74% across the three art units, reflecting variation in outcomes among the different dockets.
  • Does the 65% rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. This is a historical aggregate and does not forecast the outcome of any specific 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 Eric T Loonan 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: 488 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