LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/TERRELL S JOHNSON
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Terrell S Johnson

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 662 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 4 ART UNITS

Examiner Terrell S Johnson has allowed 589 of 662 decided applications (89%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

89% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2187 · 94%AU 2118 · 74%AU 2176 · 97%AU 2115 · 82%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Terrell S Johnson maintains a public record spanning 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 662 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 89%. The allowance rate—the percentage of decided applications that were allowed—reflects 589 allowed applications and 73 abandoned applications. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 74% to 97%, reflecting variation in outcomes within TC 2100. This pooled record aggregates decisions across multiple art units and represents historical dispositions only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled, cross-art-unit record aggregates an examiner's decisions across several art units into a single profile. The overall allowance rate describes what percentage of decided cases were allowed historically. Variation in the range (74% to 97%) reflects differences in outcomes among individual art units within the examiner's portfolio. These figures describe past record only and are not predictions of outcomes in any specific application or 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 2187
325 APPS · 94% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

94% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION306 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION20 moart unit avg 23.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.9 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility19% · art unit 39%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)78%
§103 — Obviousness49% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW94%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW94%0 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 51 decided applications with an interview and 274 without.

ART UNIT 2118
151 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE
74% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 73%
DISPOSITION112 / 39 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.1 moart unit avg 22.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.6 moart unit avg 36.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility30% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)80%
§103 — Obviousness88% · art unit 82%
§112 — Written description & definiteness50%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW86%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW66%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 64 decided applications with an interview and 87 without.

ART UNIT 2176
145 APPS · 97% ALLOWANCE

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

97% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION116 / 3 / 26allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.6 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY27.1 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility21% · art unit 41%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)74%
§103 — Obviousness38% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness25%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW100%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW97%+3 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 22 decided applications with an interview and 97 without.

ART UNIT 2115
67 APPS · 82% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines control or regulating systems, and electric power networks.

82% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 81%
DISPOSITION55 / 12 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.8 moart unit avg 25.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.4 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility21% · art unit 33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)75%
§103 — Obviousness81% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness29%
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Terrell S Johnson

  • What is Terrell S Johnson's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 89% across 662 disposed applications pooled from 4 art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 4 art units (2115, 2118, 2176, 2187) within Technology Center 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the art units?
    Allowance rates among the examiner's art units range from 74% to 97%, reflecting variation in outcomes within TC 2100.
  • What does this pooled record represent?
    This is an aggregated record of historical decisions across multiple art units. It describes past outcomes and is not a prediction of 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 Terrell S Johnson 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: 688 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