LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JEAN M CORRIELUS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jean M Corrielus

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,353 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 Jean M Corrielus has allowed 1,142 of 1,353 decided applications (84%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

84% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2162 · 79%AU 2159 · 98%AU 2172 · 87%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Jean M Corrielus maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning three art units. Across 1,353 disposed applications, the allowance rate is 84%, representing 1,142 allowed applications and 211 abandoned applications. The examiner's record spans art units 2159, 2162, and 2172. Allowance rates across these art units range from 79% to 98%, reflecting variation in outcomes across the pooled art-unit portfolio. This aggregate record reflects historical disposition data and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 84% allowance rate is calculated from all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across the three units combined. Aggregate historical figures describe past performance and are not predictions about outcomes in any specific case. Individual art units within this examiner's portfolio show varying allowance rates, which the aggregate figure does not break down or isolate.

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 2162
903 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

79% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION711 / 192 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.4 moart unit avg 23.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)41%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness52%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW74%+14 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 320 decided applications with an interview and 583 without.

ART UNIT 2159
421 APPS · 98% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

98% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION366 / 9 / 46allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.1 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.8 moart unit avg 45.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)36%
§103 — Obviousness59% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness44%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW98%-1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 114 decided applications with an interview and 261 without.

ART UNIT 2172
75 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE
87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION65 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.7 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jean M Corrielus

  • What is this examiner's overall allowance rate?
    Across 1,353 disposed applications in TC 2100, the allowance rate is 84% (1,142 allowed applications and 211 abandoned applications). This is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction for any individual application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    This examiner has a public record across three art units (2159, 2162, and 2172), all within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Do allowance rates vary across the art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across these three art units range from 79% to 98%. This pooled record is an aggregate; individual art-unit detail is available separately and shows the variation within the examiner's portfolio.
◈ 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 Jean M Corrielus 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: 1,399 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