LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/MARK A CONNOLLY
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Mark A Connolly

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 1,299 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 Mark A Connolly has allowed 1,102 of 1,299 decided applications (85%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

85% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2115 · 85%AU 2116 · 79%AU 2117 · 87%AU 2125 · 88%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Mark A Connolly maintains a public record across four art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 1,299 disposed applications, he allowed 1,102, yielding an 85% allowance rate. His record spans art units 2115, 2116, 2117, and 2125. The allowance rate across these art units ranges from 79% to 88%. This pooled figure represents decided applications—allowed and abandoned combined—and excludes any pending matters from the calculation.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates Mark A Connolly's record across multiple art units within TC 2100. The pooled allowance rate describes his historical dispositions and is not a prediction about any specific application. Because different art units cover different subject matter and receive different application volumes, the aggregate figure masks variation; the range (79% to 88%) illustrates that breadth. Pooled statistics describe past outcomes 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 2115
988 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.

85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 81%
DISPOSITION795 / 136 / 57allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.8 moart unit avg 25.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.6 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)40%
§103 — Obviousness71% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness43%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW84%+8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 148 decided applications with an interview and 783 without.

ART UNIT 2116
176 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

79% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION139 / 37 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.7 moart unit avg 24.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.3 moart unit avg 37.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility15% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)53%
§103 — Obviousness81% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness44%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW77%+8 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 40 decided applications with an interview and 136 without.

ART UNIT 2117
143 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems.

87% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 74%
DISPOSITION125 / 18 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.8 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.4 moart unit avg 33.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)43%
§103 — Obviousness67% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness54%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW85%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW88%-3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 26 decided applications with an interview and 117 without.

ART UNIT 2125
49 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 75%
DISPOSITION43 / 6 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.8 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility20% · art unit 50%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)51%
§103 — Obviousness74% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness46%

Based on 49 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Mark A Connolly

  • What is Mark A Connolly's overall allowance rate?
    His allowance rate is 85%, calculated over 1,299 disposed applications (allowed and abandoned combined, excluding pending). This is a historical aggregate and not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • How many art units does his record span?
    Mark A Connolly's public record covers four art units: 2115, 2116, 2117, and 2125, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across his art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across his art units range from 79% to 88%. The pooled 85% figure aggregates these different rates and does not represent the outcome of any single art unit or application.
  • What does the 85% figure describe?
    The 85% allowance rate describes the proportion of decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) out of 1,299 total disposed matters. It is a summary of past outcomes and does not forecast results in any pending or future 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 Mark A Connolly 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: 1,356 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