LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/NICHOLAS AUGUSTINE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Nicholas Augustine

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 953 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Nicholas Augustine has allowed 698 of 953 decided applications (73%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

73% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2141 · 76%AU 2178 · 83%AU 2179 · 47%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Nicholas Augustine has a pooled allowance rate of 73% across 953 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His record spans three art units: 2141, 2178, and 2179. Of 1010 total applications in his public record, 698 were allowed and 255 were abandoned. The allowance rate varies across these art units, ranging from 47% to 83%. This range reflects differences in the application populations and dispositions within each art unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates results across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 73% allowance rate describes outcomes on 953 decided applications—a historical summary, not a prediction for any particular filing. When an examiner works across several art units, the overall figure masks variation by unit. The stated range (47% to 83%) shows that spread exists; detailed art-unit figures appear in a separate section of this profile.

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 2141
456 APPS · 76% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

76% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION348 / 108 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.7 moart unit avg 28.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY47 moart unit avg 47.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility34% · art unit 49%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness54% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness10%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW69%+21 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 166 decided applications with an interview and 290 without.

ART UNIT 2178
380 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE
83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION268 / 55 / 57allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.3 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28.8 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility25% · art unit 36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)98%
§103 — Obviousness51% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness20%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW72%+22 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 160 decided applications with an interview and 163 without.

ART UNIT 2179
174 APPS · 47% ALLOWANCE
47% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION82 / 92 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION36 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY62.3 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility71% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)82%
§103 — Obviousness47% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW78%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW35%+43 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 49 decided applications with an interview and 125 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Nicholas Augustine

  • What is Nicholas Augustine's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 73%, calculated over 953 disposed applications (allowed and abandoned combined). This is a historical record and is not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does Nicholas Augustine work in?
    He has a substantial record across three art units (2141, 2178, and 2179) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary by art unit?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 47% to 83% across his art units. Detailed rates for each unit are provided separately in this profile.
  • What does the pooled record mean?
    The pooled figures combine all applications and outcomes across all three art units. They describe past dispositions and do not predict outcomes in any particular case or art unit.
◈ 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 Nicholas Augustine 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: 1,010 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