LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JACOB F BETIT
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jacob F Betit

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 170 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2015
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Jacob F Betit has allowed 76 of 170 decided applications (45%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

45% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2169 · 40%AU 2164 · 51%AU 2158 · 57%AU 2166 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Jacob F Betit maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 170 disposed applications, the allowance rate stands at 45%. This pooled figure reflects 76 allowed applications and 94 abandoned applications. Allowance rates across the individual art units range from 40% to 57%. The examiner's record spans art units 2158, 2164, 2166, and 2169.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units, each of which may have different statutory requirements and claim patterns. The overall allowance rate describes historical disposal outcomes and is not a prediction about any specific application. The range across art units indicates variation in the examiner's record by subject area, reflecting differences in how applications in each art unit were decided.

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 2169
80 APPS · 40% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

40% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION32 / 48 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.1 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY64.2 moart unit avg 40 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility33% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)80%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness20%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW56%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW23%+33 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 41 decided applications with an interview and 39 without.

ART UNIT 2164
61 APPS · 51% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

51% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION31 / 30 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.5 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW70%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW32%+38 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 30 decided applications with an interview and 31 without.

ART UNIT 2158
23 APPS · 57% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

57% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 48%
DISPOSITION13 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.9 moart unit avg 23.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY72.4 moart unit avg 49.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility54% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)77%
§103 — Obviousness85% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness31%

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

ART UNIT 2166
6 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION0 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.9 moart unit avg 23.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY77.1 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness75% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%

Based on 6 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jacob F Betit

  • What is Jacob F Betit's overall allowance rate?
    45% across 170 disposed applications pooled from all art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Four art units: 2158, 2164, 2166, and 2169, all within TC 2100.
  • How does the allowance rate vary across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 40% to 57% across the examiner's art units.
  • What do these figures mean for my application?
    These figures describe the examiner's past record and are not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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 Jacob F Betit 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: 170 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