LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/KRISTIE D SHINGLES
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Kristie D Shingles

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 96 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT

Examiner Kristie D Shingles has allowed 51 of 96 decided applications (53%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

53% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Kristie D Shingles maintains a public record of 96 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of those 96 decided applications, 51 were allowed and 45 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 53%. The examiner works within a single art unit. This pooled record reflects outcomes across all applications decided by this examiner in the technology center and does not constitute a prediction for any pending or future application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates all applications decided by the examiner across their art unit(s). The allowance rate reflects past decisions on applications that reached final disposition—either allowed or abandoned. Pooled figures describe historical outcomes and are correlational only; they are not predictions of the result in any individual case. An applicant's specific application may present different factual or legal circumstances.

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 2141
96 APPS · 53% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

53% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION51 / 45 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION37.9 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY61.3 moart unit avg 47.1 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW78%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW21%+57 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 54 decided applications with an interview and 42 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Kristie D Shingles

  • What is this examiner's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 53%, based on 96 disposed applications (51 allowed, 45 abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner works in one art unit (2141) within TC 2100.
  • What does this allowance rate mean for my application?
    The rate describes the examiner's historical record and is not a prediction for any specific application. Each application is evaluated on its own merits.
  • What subject matter does this examiner handle?
    The examiner's work falls within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
◈ 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 Kristie D Shingles 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: 96 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