LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JINHEE J LEE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jinhee J Lee

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 94 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION AUG 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
64%vs 54% weighted peer average+10 pts

Examiner Jinhee J Lee has allowed 60 of 94 decided applications in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

allowed60abandoned34pending0· pending excluded from the rate
The weighted peer average (54%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 14, 2026
AU 2174 · 67%AU 2175 · 36%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Jinhee J Lee maintains a pooled allowance rate of 64% across dozens of decided applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). This rate reflects the share of applications in the examiner's record that were allowed, measured among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications across the art units in this examiner's portfolio. The examiner's public record spans 2 art units within TC 2100. The allowance rate is a historical summary and does not predict the outcome of any particular application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates applications across multiple art units and represents an overall historical summary of the examiner's decisions. A pooled allowance rate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual art units may show different patterns; a separate section of this page displays per-art-unit detail. Aggregate figures provide context for the examiner's overall record but do not predict results in any given case.

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 2174
83 APPS · 67% ALLOWANCE
67% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION56 / 27 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.7 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.9 moart unit avg 42.9 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW76%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW60%+16 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 38 decided applications with an interview and 45 without.

ART UNIT 2175
11 APPS · 36% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

36% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION4 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.3 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY55.5 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jinhee J Lee

  • What is Jinhee J Lee's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 64% across dozens of decided applications in Technology Center 2100. This is the percentage of allowed applications among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications in the examiner's pooled record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 2 art units within TC 2100. Each art unit may have a different allowance rate; those per-unit figures appear in a separate section of this page.
  • Does the pooled allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical summary and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. It describes past dispositions across all the examiner's decided applications in TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    The individual art units show an allowance rate of 67%. Per-art-unit detail is displayed separately on this page.
◈ HOW LYNCH LLP CAN HELP

Where to go next.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. These are general resources about the firm's services — not advice about this examiner or any specific application.

Patent prosecution at Lynch LLPApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Work before the Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Planning a patent portfolio over timeHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.The firm's consultation optionsFree and paid consultation options across the firm's attorneys.
◈ 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 Jinhee J Lee 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 July 14, 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: 94 applications.

Rejection rates. Each §-rate is the share of this examiner's applications that drew at least one office-action rejection in which that statutory ground appears; applications with no rejection on record are excluded, and because grounds can co-occur the four do not sum to 100%. The art-unit figure beside each is the unweighted mean of the per-examiner rates across the art unit, published for §101 and §103 only. Beside the overall allowance rate we show a benchmark: for a single-art-unit examiner it is exactly that art unit's average, labeled “art-unit average”; for an examiner spanning several art units it is the “weighted peer average” — the per-art-unit averages, weighted by this examiner's application count in each — labeled distinctly because it is a blended figure, not any single art unit's average. Both are built from the same per-art-unit averages the panels show.

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