LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/REBA I ELMORE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Reba I Elmore

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 812 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION APR 2018
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Reba I Elmore has allowed 717 of 812 decided applications (88%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

88% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2189 · 86%AU 2131 · 92%AU 2187 · 91%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Reba I Elmore maintains a public record of 812 disposed applications across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). The pooled allowance rate is 88%, calculated over 717 allowed applications and 95 abandonments. Allowance rates across the art units range from 86% to 92%. This record represents the examiner's aggregate history; individual art units may vary within this span.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates outcomes across multiple art units within TC 2100. The overall figures describe historical disposition and do not predict outcomes in any specific application. Allowance rates vary by art unit; the range shown (86% to 92%) reflects this variation. Aggregate statistics characterize past performance and must not be interpreted as forecasts for future filings.

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 2189
470 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 77%
DISPOSITION405 / 65 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.5 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.1 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility23% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)52%
§103 — Obviousness17% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW92%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW85%+7 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 51 decided applications with an interview and 419 without.

ART UNIT 2131
193 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

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

92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION177 / 16 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.9 moart unit avg 26.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.7 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility31% · art unit 29%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)67%
§103 — Obviousness44% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness35%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW92%-2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 60 decided applications with an interview and 133 without.

ART UNIT 2187
149 APPS · 91% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

91% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION135 / 14 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.8 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.7 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Reba I Elmore

  • What is Reba I Elmore's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 88% over 812 disposed applications in TC 2100, based on 717 allowed and 95 abandoned applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record spans 3 art units (2131, 2187, 2189) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across the art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates range from 86% to 92% across these art units. This pooled record aggregates all three; individual art-unit rates may differ.
  • What do these figures mean for my application?
    These statistics describe the examiner's historical record and are not predictions for any specific case. Outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and examination details unique to each application.
◈ 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 Reba I Elmore 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: 812 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