LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ROBERT STEVENS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Robert Stevens

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 1,023 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 Robert Stevens has allowed 822 of 1,023 decided applications (80%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

80% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2164 · 89%AU 2162 · 65%AU 2176 · 11%AU 2142 · 57%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Robert Stevens has a pooled allowance rate of 80% across 1,023 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His public record spans 4 art units: 2142, 2162, 2164, and 2176. The allowance rate ranges from 11% to 89% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes by subject-matter area within TC 2100. Of 1,047 total applications, 822 were allowed and 201 were abandoned.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates four separate art units within TC 2100. The 80% figure represents historical outcomes across all decided cases in those units combined. Aggregate statistics describe past dispositions and do not predict the outcome of any individual application. The range of 11% to 89% shows that allowance rates vary significantly by art unit; the pooled rate is a weighted average and may not reflect the rate in any specific unit.

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 2164
759 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION657 / 78 / 24allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.6 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.1 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 58%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)78%
§103 — Obviousness73% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness52%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW89%+2 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 198 decided applications with an interview and 537 without.

ART UNIT 2162
228 APPS · 65% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

65% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION148 / 80 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.2 moart unit avg 23.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY56.6 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility40% · art unit 56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)40%
§103 — Obviousness80% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness80%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW81%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW48%+33 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 119 decided applications with an interview and 109 without.

ART UNIT 2176
37 APPS · 11% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

11% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION4 / 33 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION34 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.7 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
ART UNIT 2142
23 APPS · 57% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

57% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 45%
DISPOSITION13 / 10 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.6 moart unit avg 30.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY69.9 moart unit avg 48.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility56% · art unit 57%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)44%
§103 — Obviousness89% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness67%

Based on 23 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Robert Stevens

  • What is Robert Stevens's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 80%, based on 1,023 disposed applications across four art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does Robert Stevens cover?
    Stevens has a public record in 4 art units: 2142, 2162, 2164, and 2176, all within Technology Center 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 11% to 89% across the four art units, showing variation by subject matter within TC 2100.
  • Does the pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. Historical aggregate rates describe past dispositions only and are not predictions for any specific case.
◈ 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 Robert Stevens 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: 1,047 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