LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/KEVIN L ELLIS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Kevin L Ellis

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 294 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JAN 2011
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Kevin L Ellis has allowed 271 of 294 decided applications (92%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

92% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2188 · 94%AU 2187 · 0%AU 2117 · 0%AU 2185 · 100%AU 2186 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Kevin L Ellis maintains a public record across 5 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 294 disposed applications, the allowance rate stands at 92%. This rate reflects the ratio of allowed to decided applications (allowed plus abandoned), pooled across all art units covered. The record spans multiple distinct examination areas within TC 2100, aggregating outcomes across these units into a single historical figure. This pooled figure describes past dispositions and is not a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled, cross-art-unit record aggregates data from multiple examination areas into one overall allowance rate. That rate is historical—a summary of past decisions—not a forecast for any particular application. Art units can differ in examination scope and application characteristics. An aggregate allowance rate describes the examiner's combined record across those units and does not predict the outcome of any individual case or indicate how any single art unit performs.

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 2188
287 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION269 / 18 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.7 moart unit avg 26.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.8 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
ART UNIT 2187
3 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION0 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.5 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY58.8 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 3 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2117
2 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 74%
DISPOSITION0 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION13 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36 moart unit avg 33.2 mo
ART UNIT 2185
1 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION1 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION3.3 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY10.7 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
ART UNIT 2186
1 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION1 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION12.7 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY20.3 moart unit avg 35 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Kevin L Ellis

  • What is Kevin L Ellis's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 92%, based on 271 allowed applications and 23 abandoned applications (294 total disposed). Allowance rate is the percentage of decided applications and does not include pending cases.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    The record spans 5 art units (2117, 2185, 2186, 2187, 2188) within TC 2100. These figures are pooled across all five units.
  • Does this pooled rate apply to my application?
    This is a historical aggregate across all art units covered. It is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome and does not account for individual application characteristics, amendments, or prosecution history.
  • What does 'disposed applications' mean?
    Disposed applications are those that have been decided—either allowed or abandoned. The 294 disposed applications exclude any pending cases and form the denominator for the allowance rate calculation.
◈ 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 Kevin L Ellis 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: 294 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