Examiner Ezra James Baker has allowed 10 of 19 decided applications (53%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Ezra James Baker maintains a public record across Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The examiner's pooled allowance rate stands at 53% over 19 decided applications (10 allowed, 9 abandoned). This figure represents applications that have received final disposition—either allowed or abandoned—and excludes pending matters. The examiner works within a single art unit, examining a total of 53 applications across the public record. The allowance rate of 53% describes the historical record and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application.
This pooled record aggregates examination activity across all art units assigned to the examiner and reports aggregate figures only. The allowance rate reflects past dispositions and provides context on the examiner's historical record. Pooled statistics combine different art units and may mask variation within individual units. Aggregate figures describe what has occurred and are not predictions of outcomes in any specific application or art unit.
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 →
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.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Ezra James Baker 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: 53 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