LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/STEPHEN D ALVESTEFFER
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Stephen D Alvesteffer

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 285 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION APR 2016
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Stephen D Alvesteffer has allowed 180 of 285 decided applications (63%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

63% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2171 · 71%AU 2175 · 49%AU 2173 · 0%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Stephen D Alvesteffer maintains a public record across 3 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 285 disposed applications, he allowed 180 and 105 were abandoned, yielding a 63% allowance rate. The allowance rate ranges from 49% to 71% across these art units. This pooled figure aggregates work in multiple art units and reflects the historical decided applications. The record spans art units 2171, 2173, and 2175.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's work across multiple art units in TC 2100. The 63% allowance rate is computed from all decided applications across those units and describes the past record only—it is not a prediction of any specific application outcome. Rates vary across individual art units; the range reflects that diversity. Pooled statistics are useful for understanding overall patterns but do not forecast results in any particular 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 2171
203 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE
71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 56%
DISPOSITION144 / 59 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.3 moart unit avg 22 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY55.2 moart unit avg 37.2 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility49% · art unit 38%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)68%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness20%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW80%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW64%+16 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 87 decided applications with an interview and 116 without.

ART UNIT 2175
73 APPS · 49% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines general computer details, and program control and execution.

49% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION36 / 37 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION29.8 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY53.3 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness100% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness100%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW73%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW21%+52 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 40 decided applications with an interview and 33 without.

ART UNIT 2173
9 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
0% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 49%
DISPOSITION0 / 9 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION32.1 moart unit avg 25.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.4 moart unit avg 40.1 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Stephen D Alvesteffer

  • What is Stephen D Alvesteffer's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 63%, based on 180 allowed and 105 abandoned applications out of 285 disposed applications across all art units.
  • How many art units does he work in?
    He maintains a public record in 3 art units (2171, 2173, and 2175) within TC 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across his art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 49% to 71% across these art units. The pooled 63% figure aggregates all three.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate tell me about my application?
    The pooled rate describes the historical record across decided applications. It is not a prediction of any specific application outcome and does not indicate what will occur in any individual 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 Stephen D Alvesteffer 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: 285 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