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

Examiner Jermaine A Mincey

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 519 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 Jermaine A Mincey has allowed 300 of 519 decided applications (58%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

58% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2159 · 63%AU 2165 · 51%AU 2161 · 40%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Jermaine A Mincey maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 519 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 58%, reflecting 300 allowed applications and 219 abandonments. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 40% to 63%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units and represents the historical record of decided applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines outcomes from multiple art units into a single aggregate allowance rate. This figure describes the examiner's past record across all assigned art units and is not a prediction for any specific application. Because the examiner works across different art units with potentially different subject matter and rejection patterns, the aggregate rate masks variation. The provided range shows the breadth of allowance rates across individual art 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 2159
407 APPS · 63% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

63% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION232 / 138 / 37allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.4 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY51.3 moart unit avg 45.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility79% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)84%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW69%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW44%+25 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 271 decided applications with an interview and 99 without.

ART UNIT 2165
76 APPS · 51% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

51% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION39 / 37 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.4 moart unit avg 22.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.6 moart unit avg 39.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility80% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)40%
§103 — Obviousness80% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW11%+74 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 41 decided applications with an interview and 35 without.

ART UNIT 2161
73 APPS · 40% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

40% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION29 / 44 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.3 moart unit avg 23.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY63.2 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility54% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)69%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW72%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW15%+57 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 32 decided applications with an interview and 41 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jermaine A Mincey

  • What is Jermaine A Mincey's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 58% over 519 disposed applications (300 allowed, 219 abandoned). This is a historical aggregate across all assigned art units and is not a prediction for any particular application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans three art units within TC 2100: 2159, 2161, and 2165.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 40% to 63% across the examiner's art units. This pooled record aggregates all three units; individual art-unit rates appear in a separate detailed section.
◈ 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 Jermaine A Mincey 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: 556 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