Examiner James E Richardson has allowed 478 of 578 decided applications (83%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
James E Richardson maintains a pooled allowance rate of 83% across 578 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His record spans 2 art units. The allowance rate ranges from 78% to 99% across these art units, reflecting variation in the examiner's record within the technology center. Of 595 total applications, 478 were allowed and 100 abandoned. This pooled figure aggregates results across different art units and describes the historical record only.
A pooled record combines the examiner's work across multiple art units into a single aggregate profile. The overall allowance rate (83%) is calculated from all decided applications across those art units combined. This aggregate figure describes past outcomes and is not a prediction about any specific application. The range (78% to 99%) shows that individual art units within the examiner's portfolio have performed differently, and the pooled rate sits between these endpoints.
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 information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 253 decided applications with an interview and 191 without.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 92 decided applications with an interview and 42 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner James E Richardson 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: 595 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