LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/JOSEPH R KUDIRKA
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Joseph R Kudirka

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 798 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 Joseph R Kudirka has allowed 741 of 798 decided applications (93%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

93% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2114 · 95%AU 2113 · 68%AU 2198 · 90%AU 2151 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Joseph R Kudirka maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 798 decided applications, his pooled allowance rate is 93%. This represents 741 allowed applications and 57 abandoned applications. The allowance rate varies across his art units, ranging from 68% to 95%. The pooled figure aggregates outcomes across all four art units and describes his historical record without predicting outcomes in any specific pending application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates decisions across multiple art units into a single historical measure. The overall allowance rate of 93% reflects past outcomes across all four art units combined and does not constitute a prediction about any particular application. Allowance rates vary among individual art units; the range from 68% to 95% reflects this variation. Pooled statistics are descriptive of past record only and do not forecast results in any specific 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 2114
734 APPS · 95% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring.

95% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 84%
DISPOSITION669 / 38 / 27allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.6 moart unit avg 23.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY26 moart unit avg 35.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility45% · art unit 34%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)66%
§103 — Obviousness55% · art unit 74%
§112 — Written description & definiteness70%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW96%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW93%+3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 367 decided applications with an interview and 340 without.

ART UNIT 2113
47 APPS · 68% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring.

68% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 79%
DISPOSITION32 / 15 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.8 moart unit avg 21.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.7 moart unit avg 32.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility59% · art unit 37%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)69%
§103 — Obviousness79% · art unit 66%
§112 — Written description & definiteness46%

Based on 47 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2198
40 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines program control and execution.

90% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 83%
DISPOSITION36 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.4 moart unit avg 25.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.3 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 50%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)44%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness63%

Based on 40 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2151
4 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION4 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.6 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.9 moart unit avg 44.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness67%

Based on 4 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Joseph R Kudirka

  • What is Joseph R Kudirka's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 93%, based on 798 decided applications (741 allowed, 57 abandoned). This is a historical measure and is not a prediction of any specific pending application.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    His public record spans 4 art units (2113, 2114, 2151, 2198) within TC 2100.
  • Does his allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. Allowance rates across his art units range from 68% to 95%. The pooled 93% figure is an aggregate across all four art units. Per-art-unit detail is available in the separate art unit section of this profile.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate tell me?
    It describes his aggregate historical record across all four art units combined. It is not a prediction for any individual application and does not account for differences in application complexity, claim scope, or prior art across cases.
◈ 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 Joseph R Kudirka 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: 825 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