LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Shawn X Gu

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,287 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Shawn X Gu has allowed 1,203 of 1,287 decided applications (93%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

93% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2138 · 96%AU 2188 · 93%AU 2189 · 86%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Shawn X Gu maintains a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 1,287 disposed applications, the examiner allowed 1,203, yielding an overall allowance rate of 93%. The allowance rate ranges from 86% to 96% across the examiner's art units. This pooled figure represents the aggregate of decided cases—allowed and abandoned applications—and does not include pending matters. The record spans art units 2138, 2188, and 2189.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile presents a pooled allowance rate across multiple art units within TC 2100. Pooled figures aggregate the examiner's record across different subject areas and represent historical data only. The overall 93% rate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction for any specific pending application. Individual art units may show variation from the aggregate; per-art-unit data is available separately. Allowance rates reflect decided cases and exclude pending applications.

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 2138
842 APPS · 96% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines input/output (I/O) data transfer, and memory access and allocation.

96% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 82%
DISPOSITION789 / 36 / 17allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION14.9 moart unit avg 19.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY22 moart unit avg 32.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility24% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)84%
§103 — Obviousness51% · art unit 71%
§112 — Written description & definiteness48%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW99%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW90%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 521 decided applications with an interview and 304 without.

ART UNIT 2188
235 APPS · 93% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

93% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION218 / 17 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.2 moart unit avg 26.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY32 moart unit avg 39.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility26% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness50% · art unit 74%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW98%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW91%+7 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 49 decided applications with an interview and 186 without.

ART UNIT 2189
227 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 77%
DISPOSITION196 / 31 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24.8 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.8 moart unit avg 39 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility37% · art unit 44%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)89%
§103 — Obviousness30% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness33%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW97%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW74%+23 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 124 decided applications with an interview and 103 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Shawn X Gu

  • What is Shawn X Gu's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 93% over 1,287 disposed applications in Technology Center 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner maintains a public record across three art units: 2138, 2188, and 2189.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 86% to 96% across the examiner's art units. Individual art-unit rates are detailed separately.
  • What does this allowance rate mean for my application?
    This figure describes the examiner's historical record of allowed and abandoned applications and is not a prediction for any specific pending 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 Shawn X Gu 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: 1,304 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