LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jae Un Yu

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,094 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 Jae Un Yu has allowed 996 of 1,094 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

91% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2138 · 98%AU 2135 · 95%AU 2185 · 80%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Jae Un Yu has a public record of 1,122 total applications across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 1,094 disposed applications, 996 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 91%. The examiner's allowance rate ranges from 80% to 98% across these art units. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units and reflects the proportion of decided applications that were allowed in the examiner's past record.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's allowance rates across multiple art units into a single overall figure. The 91% allowance rate describes the examiner's historical record of allowed applications relative to all decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Art units may show different allowance rates; the range reflects this variation. Pooled figures are correlational summaries, not causative indicators of prosecution results.

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 2138
387 APPS · 98% ALLOWANCE

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

98% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION353 / 6 / 28allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION14.4 moart unit avg 19.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY21.3 moart unit avg 32.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility4% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)51%
§103 — Obviousness63% · art unit 71%
§112 — Written description & definiteness13%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW98%0 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 66 decided applications with an interview and 293 without.

ART UNIT 2135
370 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE

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

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION351 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.3 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.8 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility13% · art unit 21%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)52%
§103 — Obviousness61% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness11%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW96%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW95%+1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 74 decided applications with an interview and 296 without.

ART UNIT 2185
365 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE
80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION292 / 73 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.5 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.6 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility13% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)41%
§103 — Obviousness72% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness21%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW74%+16 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 130 decided applications with an interview and 235 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jae Un Yu

  • What is Examiner Jae Un Yu's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 91%, based on 996 allowed applications out of 1,094 total disposed applications across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner has a public record across 3 art units: 2135, 2138, and 2185.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 80% to 98% across the examiner's art units. The pooled 91% figure aggregates all three.
  • What does the allowance rate mean for my application?
    The allowance rate is a historical summary of the examiner's past decisions and is 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 Jae Un Yu 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: 1,122 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