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

Examiner Mariela D Reyes

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 371 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 Mariela D Reyes has allowed 223 of 371 decided applications (60%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

60% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2167 · 65%AU 2159 · 33%AU 2142 · 96%AU 2169 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Mariela D Reyes has a pooled public record of 371 disposed applications across 4 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over this decided record, the allowance rate stands at 60%, based on 223 allowed applications and 148 abandoned applications. The examiner's record spans art units 2142, 2159, 2167, and 2169. Allowance rates across these art units range from 33% to 96%, reflecting variation in outcomes across the different subject-matter areas within TC 2100.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record aggregates applications and outcomes across multiple art units within TC 2100. The pooled allowance rate of 60% describes the examiner's past performance on decided applications and is not a prediction about any specific application. Variation in allowance rates across individual art units—here, a range of 33% to 96%—is typical in cross-art-unit records and reflects differences in application types and examination patterns within the technology center. Pooled figures provide general historical context 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 2167
260 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION170 / 90 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.6 moart unit avg 24.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54.9 moart unit avg 41.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 43%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)52%
§103 — Obviousness78% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness16%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW79%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW59%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 84 decided applications with an interview and 176 without.

ART UNIT 2159
83 APPS · 33% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

33% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION27 / 56 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.2 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.6 moart unit avg 45.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility54% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)84%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness37%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW54%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW17%+37 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 35 decided applications with an interview and 48 without.

ART UNIT 2142
46 APPS · 96% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

96% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION26 / 1 / 19allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.2 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.6 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility80% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)60%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness42%

Based on 46 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2169
1 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION0 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.7 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Mariela D Reyes

  • What is Mariela D Reyes's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 60%, calculated over 371 disposed applications (223 allowed and 148 abandoned). This rate describes decided applications only and is not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Mariela D Reyes has a public record spanning 4 art units within TC 2100: art units 2142, 2159, 2167, and 2169.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates across these art units range from 33% to 96%. This variation reflects differences in outcomes across different subject-matter areas within the technology center. The pooled 60% figure is an aggregate across all four units.
  • Does this record include pending applications?
    No. The allowance rate of 60% is based on 371 disposed (decided) applications only. The total applications figure (390) includes pending cases, which are excluded from 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 Mariela D Reyes 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: 390 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