LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JOHNESE T JOHNSON
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Johnese T Johnson

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 359 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2020
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Johnese T Johnson has allowed 213 of 359 decided applications (59%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

59% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2166 · 62%AU 2168 · 57%AU 2169 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Johnese T Johnson maintains a public record across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 359 disposed applications in the pooled record, 213 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 59%. The allowance rate ranges from 57% to 62% across the examiner's art units. This pooled figure reflects the aggregate of decisions across multiple art units and does not predict outcomes in any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data from multiple art units into a single allowance-rate figure. This aggregate describes the examiner's historical pattern of decisions across all their assigned art units combined. The allowance rate is calculated from disposed (decided) applications only and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Ranges reflect variation among the individual art units that compose the pooled record.

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 2166
213 APPS · 62% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

62% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION131 / 82 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.4 moart unit avg 23.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY58.3 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)79%
§103 — Obviousness64% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness13%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW75%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW56%+19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 61 decided applications with an interview and 152 without.

ART UNIT 2168
145 APPS · 57% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

57% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION82 / 63 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.7 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY61.1 moart unit avg 43.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)82%
§103 — Obviousness95% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness36%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW71%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW47%+24 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 59 decided applications with an interview and 86 without.

ART UNIT 2169
1 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION0 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.1 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.6 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Johnese T Johnson

  • What is Johnese T Johnson's overall allowance rate?
    59% across 359 disposed applications, pooled from all assigned art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    3 art units: 2166, 2168, and 2169.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 57% to 62% across the examiner's art units with a substantial record.
  • What does this pooled record cover?
    TC 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The pooled figure aggregates all decisions across the examiner's assigned art units and does not predict outcomes in any specific application.
◈ 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 Johnese T Johnson 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: 359 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