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

Examiner Marcin R Filipczyk

TECH CENTER 2100 · 6 ART UNITS · 698 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 6 ART UNITS

Examiner Marcin R Filipczyk has allowed 476 of 698 decided applications (68%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

68% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2158 · 65%AU 2153 · 77%AU 2163 · 63%AU 2169 · 45%AU 2171 · 56%AU 2161 · 86%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Marcin R Filipczyk's public record spans 6 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 698 disposed applications, the examiner issued allowances in 476 cases, yielding a 68% allowance rate. The examiner's record across TC 2100 art units ranges from 45% to 77% allowance rates. The examiner has also recorded 222 abandoned applications. This pooled record reflects activity across multiple art units with varying allowance patterns.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's record across 6 separate art units. The pooled allowance rate (68% of decided cases) describes historical outcomes across all these art units combined and is not a prediction for any individual application. The stated range (45% to 77%) indicates variation in allowance rates among the examiner's art units; individual art-unit records appear in a separate detailed section. Pooled statistics describe the past record only.

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 2158
364 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 48%
DISPOSITION236 / 128 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.3 moart unit avg 23.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47.2 moart unit avg 49.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility46% · art unit 52%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)88%
§103 — Obviousness53% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness85%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW76%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW45%+31 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 231 decided applications with an interview and 133 without.

ART UNIT 2153
249 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

77% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION167 / 49 / 33allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.9 moart unit avg 27.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.9 moart unit avg 41.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility25% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness30%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW82%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW68%+14 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 144 decided applications with an interview and 72 without.

ART UNIT 2163
68 APPS · 63% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

63% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION43 / 25 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.9 moart unit avg 23.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53.4 moart unit avg 40.3 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW86%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW38%+48 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 36 decided applications with an interview and 32 without.

ART UNIT 2169
20 APPS · 45% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

45% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION9 / 11 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.9 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY51.6 moart unit avg 40 mo
ART UNIT 2171
16 APPS · 56% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
56% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION9 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.7 moart unit avg 22 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.8 moart unit avg 37.2 mo
ART UNIT 2161
14 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION12 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.3 moart unit avg 23.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.7 moart unit avg 39 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Marcin R Filipczyk

  • What is this examiner's overall allowance rate?
    Across 698 decided applications, the examiner allowed 476, for an allowance rate of 68%. This figure pools all art units in the examiner's record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 6 art units: 2153, 2158, 2161, 2163, 2169, and 2171, all within TC 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across this examiner's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 45% to 77%. Individual art-unit allowance rates are detailed in the per-art-unit section.
  • What is the difference between total and disposed applications?
    Total applications (731) includes pending cases. Disposed applications (698) counts only decided cases—allowed and abandoned combined. The allowance rate (68%) is calculated from the disposed count.
◈ 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 Marcin R Filipczyk 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: 731 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