LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/OLUWATOSIN O ALABI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Oluwatosin O Alabi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 226 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 Oluwatosin O Alabi has allowed 139 of 226 decided applications (62%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

62% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2129 · 73%AU 2126 · 34%AU 2123 · 52%AU 2124 · 11%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Oluwatosin O Alabi maintains a public record spanning 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 226 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 139, yielding an overall allowance rate of 62%. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 34% to 73%. This aggregate figure reflects decisions rendered across multiple subject areas within TC 2100 and does not describe the record in any single art unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, creating a single allowance-rate figure that represents the examiner's overall history of decisions. That aggregate rate describes past outcomes across different technology areas and is correlational data only—a historical summary. It is not a prediction of any specific application's disposition. Individual art units may show different patterns; a separate section of this page details per-art-unit records.

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 2129
203 APPS · 73% ALLOWANCE

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

73% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION111 / 42 / 50allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.6 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48 moart unit avg 42.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility67% · art unit 63%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)74%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness82%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW79%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW60%+19 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 103 decided applications with an interview and 50 without.

ART UNIT 2126
35 APPS · 34% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

34% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION12 / 23 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.8 moart unit avg 29.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53.2 moart unit avg 44.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility80% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)71%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness91%

Based on 35 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2123
29 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 51%
DISPOSITION15 / 14 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.4 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.9 moart unit avg 43.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility86% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)61%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness64%

Based on 29 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2124
9 APPS · 11% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

11% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION1 / 8 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.5 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.8 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility78% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness89%

Based on 9 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Oluwatosin O Alabi

  • What is Examiner Alabi's overall allowance rate?
    62%, based on 139 allowed applications out of 226 disposed applications in the examiner's pooled record across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    4 art units (2123, 2124, 2126, 2129) within Technology Center 2100.
  • How much does the allowance rate vary across this examiner's art units?
    The allowance rate ranges from 34% to 73% across the examiner's art units with substantial records.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    This aggregate rate describes the examiner's historical decisions across multiple art units and is not a prediction of any specific application. Individual art-unit records may differ; see the per-art-unit section for detailed breakdowns.
◈ 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 Oluwatosin O Alabi 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: 276 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