LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/PHENUEL S SALOMON
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Phenuel S Salomon

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 796 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 5 ART UNITS

Examiner Phenuel S Salomon has allowed 577 of 796 decided applications (72%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

72% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2171 · 72%AU 2146 · 91%AU 2179 · 36%AU 2178 · 34%AU 2173 · 86%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Phenuel S Salomon maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning five art units (2146, 2171, 2173, 2178, 2179). Across 796 decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 72%. Of the 824 total applications in the examiner's record, 577 were allowed and 219 were abandoned. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 34% to 91%. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across all five art units where the examiner maintains a substantial record.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This page reports the examiner's pooled record across multiple art units in TC 2100. The aggregate allowance rate of 72% reflects the combined outcomes across all five art units and describes the historical record, not a prediction about any specific application. Because different art units cover different subject matter within the technology center, applicants may find the per-art-unit breakdown (available separately) more relevant to their particular technology.

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 2171
540 APPS · 72% ALLOWANCE
72% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION387 / 153 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20.4 moart unit avg 22 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.3 moart unit avg 37.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility36% · art unit 38%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)59%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness34%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW81%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW65%+16 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 221 decided applications with an interview and 319 without.

ART UNIT 2146
188 APPS · 91% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

91% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 50%
DISPOSITION145 / 15 / 28allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.2 moart unit avg 32 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42.2 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility51% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)62%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness41%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW90%+1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 55 decided applications with an interview and 105 without.

ART UNIT 2179
45 APPS · 36% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
36% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION16 / 29 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48.3 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)0%
§103 — Obviousness0% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 45 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2178
29 APPS · 34% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
34% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION10 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.1 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY43 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
ART UNIT 2173
22 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION19 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION15.7 moart unit avg 25.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.7 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility18% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)32%
§103 — Obviousness82% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%

Based on 22 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Phenuel S Salomon

  • What is Phenuel S Salomon's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 72%, calculated from 796 decided applications (577 allowed and 219 abandoned). This figure aggregates the record across all five art units and is descriptive of past outcomes, not predictive of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Phenuel S Salomon maintains a public record across five art units (2146, 2171, 2173, 2178, 2179) within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 34% to 91% across the examiner's art units. This range reflects variation in outcomes among different art units; per-art-unit detail is available in a separate section of this page.
  • How many applications are in this examiner's record?
    The examiner's record includes 824 total applications. Of these, 796 have been decided (577 allowed, 219 abandoned), and the remainder remain pending.
◈ 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 Phenuel S Salomon 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: 824 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