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

Examiner Nicholas J Simonetti

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 591 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Nicholas J Simonetti has allowed 483 of 591 decided applications (82%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

82% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2137 · 88%AU 2187 · 52%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Nicholas J Simonetti maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 625 total applications, 483 have been allowed and 108 abandoned, yielding 591 disposed applications. The pooled allowance rate is 82% of those decided applications. Allowance rates across his art units range from 52% to 88%, reflecting variation in outcomes by art unit. This aggregate record describes past dispositions and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates data from multiple art units within TC 2100, presenting an overall allowance rate calculated from all decided cases across those units. Aggregate statistics describe historical outcomes and are not predictive of results in any specific application. Variation across individual art units—visible in the 52% to 88% range—reflects differences in subject matter and application complexity by art unit; the pooled figure is a cross-unit average and does not apply uniformly to every case.

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 2137
528 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 68%
DISPOSITION433 / 61 / 34allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.4 moart unit avg 25.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY31.4 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility26% · art unit 25%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)86%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW89%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW87%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 180 decided applications with an interview and 314 without.

ART UNIT 2187
97 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION50 / 47 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.7 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY46.4 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility20% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)55%
§103 — Obviousness98% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness43%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW47%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 24 decided applications with an interview and 73 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Nicholas J Simonetti

  • What is Nicholas J Simonetti's overall allowance rate?
    82% of his 591 disposed applications have been allowed. Disposed applications include both allowed and abandoned cases; pending applications are excluded from this calculation.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    This record spans 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Do allowance rates vary by art unit?
    Yes. Allowance rates across his art units range from 52% to 88%, indicating variation in outcomes by art unit. The 82% pooled rate is an aggregate across all his units.
  • Does this pooled rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. This historical record describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any individual application's outcome.
◈ 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 J Simonetti 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: 625 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