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

Examiner Sergey Datskovskiy

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 24 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION AUG 2006
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT

Examiner Sergey Datskovskiy has allowed 13 of 24 decided applications (54%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

54% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Sergey Datskovskiy maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 24 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 13 and abandoned 11, yielding an allowance rate of 54% across the decided pool. This record spans a single art unit. The allowance rate reflects the ratio of allowed to all decided applications in the examiner's pooled record and is not a prediction of outcomes in any individual case.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates an examiner's work across one or more art units within TC 2100. The overall allowance rate and application counts describe historical dispositions and do not predict the result in a specific pending application. Pooled figures smooth variation across art units and subject matter, making them a broad measure of past patterns rather than a forecast.

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
24 APPS · 54% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

54% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION13 / 11 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION33 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.5 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Sergey Datskovskiy

  • What is Sergey Datskovskiy's overall allowance rate?
    54%, based on 13 allowed applications out of 24 disposed (allowed plus abandoned) applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    One art unit within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Does the allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The pooled rate reflects past dispositions and is not a prediction of any individual case.
  • What subject matter does this examiner cover?
    Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
◈ 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 Sergey Datskovskiy 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: 24 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