LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/RUSSELL L GUILL
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Russell L Guill

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 543 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION APR 2022
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Russell L Guill has allowed 326 of 543 decided applications (60%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

60% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2123 · 55%AU 2127 · 74%AU 2147 · 89%AU 2146 · 69%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Russell L Guill has a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 543 disposed applications, 326 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 60%. The allowance rate across his art units ranges from 55% to 89%, reflecting variation in the record by subject matter and art unit. This pooled figure aggregates his record across all four art units and describes historical outcomes on decided cases.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This record is pooled across multiple art units, meaning it combines allowance data from different subject areas within TC 2100. The aggregate allowance rate (60% of 543 decided cases) describes past outcomes and is not a prediction of any specific application. The range of 55% to 89% shows that allowance rates vary by art unit. Pooled figures offer a broad view but do not isolate performance in any single art 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 2123
422 APPS · 55% ALLOWANCE

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

55% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 51%
DISPOSITION230 / 192 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION32.5 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY55.7 moart unit avg 43.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility79% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)18%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 85%
§112 — Written description & definiteness69%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW76%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW44%+32 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 139 decided applications with an interview and 283 without.

ART UNIT 2127
58 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE

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

74% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION43 / 15 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.8 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY49.1 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility69% · art unit 51%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)37%
§103 — Obviousness83% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness83%
ART UNIT 2147
47 APPS · 89% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

89% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 44%
DISPOSITION42 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION34.3 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY48.7 moart unit avg 46.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility69% · art unit 74%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)15%
§103 — Obviousness69% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness92%

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

ART UNIT 2146
16 APPS · 69% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

69% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 50%
DISPOSITION11 / 5 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.8 moart unit avg 32 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.9 moart unit avg 45 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 70%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)79%
§103 — Obviousness93% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness64%

Based on 16 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Russell L Guill

  • What is Russell L Guill's overall allowance rate?
    60% across 543 decided applications pooled from all art units within TC 2100. This is the percentage of applications allowed out of all disposed cases (allowed plus abandoned).
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Four art units (2123, 2127, 2146, 2147), all within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Why does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Allowance rates range from 55% to 89% across the examiner's art units. This pooled record aggregates those different rates. Variation reflects different subject matter, application volumes, and rejection patterns by art unit.
  • Is the 60% allowance rate a prediction for my application?
    No. This is a historical summary of decided cases and is not a prediction of any specific application outcome. Individual cases depend on claim scope, prior art, and examination.
◈ 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 Russell L Guill 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: 543 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