LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JAY A MORRISON
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jay A Morrison

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 976 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 Jay A Morrison has allowed 780 of 976 decided applications (80%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

80% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2168 · 75%AU 2151 · 94%AU 2198 · 85%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Jay A Morrison maintains a public record across 3 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 976 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 80%, reflecting 780 allowed and 196 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 75% to 94% across the art units in which the examiner has maintained a substantial record. This record is pooled across all three art units and does not attribute specific rates to individual units.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units and reflects historical disposition of applications decided. The figures presented—allowance rate, art-unit count, and the range across units—describe past outcomes and are correlational in nature. An aggregate allowance rate is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome and does not account for differences in application complexity, claim scope, or prior art encountered within individual units.

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 2168
630 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION471 / 159 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.4 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.3 moart unit avg 43.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility54% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)68%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness23%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW87%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW63%+24 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 312 decided applications with an interview and 318 without.

ART UNIT 2151
201 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION150 / 10 / 41allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.7 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.2 moart unit avg 44.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility76% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)68%
§103 — Obviousness82% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW88%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 95 decided applications with an interview and 65 without.

ART UNIT 2198
186 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines program control and execution.

85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 83%
DISPOSITION159 / 27 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.6 moart unit avg 25.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.3 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility47% · art unit 50%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)89%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness49%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW93%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW77%+16 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 99 decided applications with an interview and 87 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jay A Morrison

  • What is Jay A Morrison's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 80%, based on 976 decided applications (780 allowed, 196 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Jay A Morrison maintains a public record across 3 art units in TC 2100: art units 2151, 2168, and 2198.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across the art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 75% to 94% across the examiner's art units with substantial records. This pooled figure of 80% aggregates all three units.
  • What does the pooled record mean for my application?
    The pooled record describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Allowance rates reflect historical data and do not account for individual application circumstances or claim characteristics.
◈ 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 Jay A Morrison 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: 1,017 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