Examiner Mark D Featherstone has allowed 29 of 41 decided applications (71%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Mark D Featherstone maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 41 disposed applications, he issued 29 allowances, yielding a 71% allowance rate. The record spans art units 2111 and 2166. Of 54 total applications in his record, 12 were abandoned. This pooled figure represents the aggregate of his work across both art units and is a description of past dispositions only.
This pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units within TC 2100. The allowance rate and disposed-application count describe the examiner's historical record as a whole and are not predictions of outcomes in any individual application. Pooled figures mask variation across individual art units; separate per-unit data, where available, may show different patterns. These statistics are correlational and do not establish causation.
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 →
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.
Based on 39 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.
Based on 15 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Mark D Featherstone 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: 54 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