LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JOHN E JOHANSEN
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner John E Johansen

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 323 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner John E Johansen has allowed 251 of 323 decided applications (78%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

78% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2146 · 84%AU 2127 · 68%AU 2187 · 84%AU 2123 · 44%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

John E Johansen has a pooled allowance rate of 78% across 323 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His record spans four art units: 2123, 2127, 2146, and 2187. Of 353 total applications, 251 were allowed and 72 were abandoned. The allowance rate across his art units ranges from 68% to 84%, reflecting variation in the decided record among the different art units in which he works.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all applications across four art units into a single profile. The overall allowance rate describes the examiner's historical record and does not constitute a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Aggregate figures mask variation among individual art units. The stated range (68% to 84%) reflects the spread of allowance rates among those separate units; the pooled figure is the combined result across all of them.

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 2146
146 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 50%
DISPOSITION122 / 24 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.8 moart unit avg 32 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY37.7 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility79% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)33%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness61%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW75%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 63 decided applications with an interview and 83 without.

ART UNIT 2127
100 APPS · 68% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

68% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION68 / 32 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.7 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.9 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility79% · art unit 51%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)49%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness85%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW83%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW55%+28 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 47 decided applications with an interview and 53 without.

ART UNIT 2187
98 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION57 / 11 / 30allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION34.4 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.7 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility86% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)41%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness56%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW96%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW76%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 26 decided applications with an interview and 42 without.

ART UNIT 2123
9 APPS · 44% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

44% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 51%
DISPOSITION4 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.4 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.4 moart unit avg 43.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility89% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)56%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness67%

Based on 9 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner John E Johansen

  • What is John E Johansen's overall allowance rate?
    78% across 323 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Four: 2123, 2127, 2146, and 2187.
  • Does the allowance rate vary among his art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 68% to 84% across these art units, reflecting variation in the decided record among them.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    This pooled figure is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The actual allowance rate in your art unit may differ from the overall figure.
◈ 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 John E Johansen 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: 353 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