LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/SARA M ENGLAND
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Sara M England

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 287 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2018
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Sara M England has allowed 126 of 287 decided applications (44%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

44% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2172 · 45%AU 2179 · 41%AU 2144 · 100%AU 2173 · 33%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Sara M England maintains a public record across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 287 disposed applications, she allowed 126 and abandoned 161, for an allowance rate of 44%. Allowance rates across her art units range from 41% to 45%. This pooled figure aggregates her record across multiple distinct art units and reflects outcomes on applications that reached final disposition—neither pending applications nor future filings.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record spans multiple art units and presents aggregate statistics. The overall allowance rate describes past outcomes across all of those units combined and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Comparing this figure to art-unit or technology-center averages provides context for the examiner's historical record, but such comparisons are descriptive only and do not forecast results on any individual case.

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 2172
139 APPS · 45% ALLOWANCE
45% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION62 / 77 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.9 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY73 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility38% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)64%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness60%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW57%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW36%+21 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 58 decided applications with an interview and 81 without.

ART UNIT 2179
135 APPS · 41% ALLOWANCE
41% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION55 / 80 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.4 moart unit avg 26.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53.1 moart unit avg 43.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)0%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 86%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW27%+40 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 46 decided applications with an interview and 89 without.

ART UNIT 2144
7 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION7 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION33.9 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCYart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility50% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)50%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%

Based on 7 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

ART UNIT 2173
6 APPS · 33% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
33% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION2 / 4 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION32.1 moart unit avg 25.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Sara M England

  • What is Sara M England's overall allowance rate?
    44% across 287 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    Four art units: 2144, 2172, 2173, and 2179.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across her art units?
    Allowance rates range from 41% to 45% across her art units. This is a factual spread and is not a prediction for any specific 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 Sara M England 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: 287 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