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

Examiner Justin T Darrow

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 66 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION NOV 2006
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT

Examiner Justin T Darrow has allowed 55 of 66 decided applications (83%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

83% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Justin T Darrow has disposed of 66 applications across Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those decided applications, 55 were allowed and 11 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 83%. This pooled record spans a single art unit. The figures reflect outcomes on applications that have reached final disposition and do not include pending cases. The allowance rate is a historical measure of past decisions and is not a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This examiner's record is pooled across all art units under their assignment. The aggregated allowance rate describes the proportion of decided applications that were allowed versus abandoned over the full public record. Pooled figures blend outcomes across different subject areas and cannot predict the outcome of any individual case. For art-unit-specific rates and details, consult the separate art-unit breakdown section.

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 2132
66 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION55 / 11 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29 moart unit avg 27.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.8 moart unit avg 41 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Justin T Darrow

  • What is Justin T Darrow's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 83%, calculated from 55 allowed and 11 abandoned applications out of 66 total decided applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2100.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate mean for my application?
    The pooled rate is a historical summary of past decisions across all art units and does not predict the outcome of any specific pending 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 Justin T Darrow 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: 66 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