LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/RAMON A MERCADO
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Ramon A Mercado

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 411 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION AUG 2024
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Ramon A Mercado has allowed 332 of 411 decided applications (81%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

81% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2132 · 85%AU 2182 · 80%AU 2186 · 20%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Ramon A Mercado maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 411 disposed applications, his allowance rate is 81%, reflecting 332 allowed and 79 abandoned applications. The allowance rate ranges from 20% to 85% across his art units, indicating variation in outcomes by subject area within TC 2100. This pooled figure aggregates work across distinct art units and describes the historical record only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record is pooled across multiple art units, meaning it combines applications from different subject areas within TC 2100. The aggregate allowance rate reflects past dispositions and is not a prediction for any specific application. Rates vary across individual art units; the overall 81% does not apply uniformly to every art unit. Understanding pooled data requires recognizing it as a summary that masks underlying variation by subject matter.

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 2132
332 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

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

85% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION281 / 51 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.1 moart unit avg 27.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.2 moart unit avg 41 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility28% · art unit 21%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)42%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 81%
§112 — Written description & definiteness48%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW80%+12 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 131 decided applications with an interview and 201 without.

ART UNIT 2182
59 APPS · 80% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines data-processing methods for specific functions, and processing data by its order or content.

80% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION47 / 12 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.1 moart unit avg 24.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY55.9 moart unit avg 37.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 31%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)57%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 76%
§112 — Written description & definiteness60%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW72%+28 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 16 decided applications with an interview and 43 without.

ART UNIT 2186
20 APPS · 20% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

20% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION4 / 16 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.8 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.5 moart unit avg 35 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)61%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 20 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ramon A Mercado

  • What is Ramon A Mercado's overall allowance rate?
    81% over 411 disposed applications (332 allowed, 79 abandoned). This is a historical aggregate and is not predictive of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Three art units (2132, 2182, 2186) within Technology Center 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across art units?
    Allowance rates range from 20% to 85% across the art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by subject area.
  • Does the 81% rate apply to my application?
    No. The 81% is a pooled historical average across all art units and is not predictive of any specific 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 Ramon A Mercado 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: 411 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