LYNCH·LLP
Book a consultation →
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/MICHAL LAWRENCE BOGACKI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Michal Lawrence Bogacki

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 130 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION APR 2023
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Michal Lawrence Bogacki has allowed 118 of 130 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

91% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2157 · 92%AU 2156 · 80%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Michal Lawrence Bogacki holds a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning 2 art units (2156, 2157). Over 130 disposed applications, the examiner issued allowances in 118 cases, for an allowance rate of 91 percent. Twelve applications were abandoned. This pooled record aggregates outcomes across both art units and reflects decided cases only; pending applications are excluded from the allowance-rate calculation.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record is a pool across multiple art units within TC 2100. Aggregate figures describe the examiner's past record and do not constitute a prediction of any specific application's outcome. The allowance rate reflects the share of allowed cases among all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned). Different art units may show different patterns; a separate section of this page presents per-art-unit detail.

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 2157
115 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION106 / 9 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.1 moart unit avg 28 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.1 moart unit avg 46.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility34% · art unit 48%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)94%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness56%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 60 decided applications with an interview and 55 without.

◈ ART UNIT 2156
15 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 69%
DISPOSITION12 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.6 moart unit avg 20.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.4 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility23% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness62% · art unit 84%
§112 — Written description & definiteness38%

Based on 15 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Michal Lawrence Bogacki

  • What is the overall allowance rate for this examiner?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 91 percent, calculated over 130 disposed applications (118 allowed, 12 abandoned). This is the examiner's pooled record across both art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 2 art units (2156 and 2157) within Technology Center 2100.
  • What does the allowance rate tell me about my application?
    The allowance rate is a historical summary and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. It reflects past decided cases and does not account for the details, merit, or prosecution history of any individual matter.
  • Why do the figures exclude pending applications?
    The allowance rate is calculated only from decided cases (allowed and abandoned applications). Pending applications have not yet been decided and are therefore not included in the denominator.
◈ 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 Michal Lawrence Bogacki 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: 130 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