LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/RONALD D HARTMAN JR
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Ronald D Hartman Jr

TECH CENTER 2100 · 5 ART UNITS · 1,240 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 Ronald D Hartman Jr has allowed 1,128 of 1,240 decided applications (91%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

91% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2121 · 88%AU 2119 · 94%AU 2118 · 92%AU 2126 · 94%AU 2127 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Ronald D Hartman Jr maintains a pooled allowance rate of 91% across 1,240 decided applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). His record spans five art units: 2118, 2119, 2121, 2126, and 2127. Of the 1,305 total applications, 1,128 were allowed and 112 abandoned. The allowance rate varies across these art units, ranging from 88% to 94%. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's activity across all five art units and describes the historical record without predicting outcomes for individual applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates statistics across multiple art units, producing an overall average that reflects the examiner's combined output. The allowance rate shown here—91%—is a historical average of decided applications across TC 2100 and does not forecast results on any single case. The range (88% to 94%) indicates variation among the five art units but does not identify which rate applies to which unit. Pooled data provides context on the examiner's overall practice; individual applications are decided on their own merits.

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 2121
645 APPS · 88% ALLOWANCE

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

88% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION570 / 75 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.9 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.6 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility34% · art unit 46%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness59% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW88%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 32 decided applications with an interview and 613 without.

ART UNIT 2119
478 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines electric power networks, supply, and distribution.

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 83%
DISPOSITION390 / 23 / 65allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.2 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY25.8 moart unit avg 31.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility19% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)76%
§103 — Obviousness55% · art unit 74%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW94%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 24 decided applications with an interview and 389 without.

ART UNIT 2118
133 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE
92% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION122 / 11 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.3 moart unit avg 22.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28.3 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility36% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)73%
§103 — Obviousness54% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
ART UNIT 2126
47 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 63%
DISPOSITION44 / 3 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.4 moart unit avg 29.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY35.7 moart unit avg 44.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 53%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)73%
§103 — Obviousness73% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness18%

Based on 47 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2127
2 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION2 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION18.7 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCYart unit avg 41.8 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ronald D Hartman Jr

  • What is Ronald D Hartman Jr's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 91%, based on 1,240 decided applications (1,128 allowed, 112 abandoned) across all five art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    He has a record in five art units: 2118, 2119, 2121, 2126, and 2127, all within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Is the allowance rate the same across all art units?
    No. The allowance rate ranges from 88% to 94% across the five art units. The pooled figure of 91% is an aggregate; individual art units vary within that range.
  • Does this allowance rate apply to my application?
    The pooled rate describes the examiner's historical record and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Each application is examined according to patent law and the facts of that 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 Ronald D Hartman Jr 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: 1,305 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