LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/THOMAS J CLEARY
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Thomas J Cleary

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 956 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 Thomas J Cleary has allowed 690 of 956 decided applications (72%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

72% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2111 · 61%AU 2185 · 79%AU 2175 · 86%AU 2186 · 81%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Thomas J Cleary has a public record of 987 applications across 4 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 956 decided applications, 690 were allowed, yielding an overall allowance rate of 72%. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 61% to 86%. This pooled figure aggregates outcomes across multiple distinct art units and reflects historical disposition data only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record spans multiple art units and presents an aggregate allowance rate. This figure describes the examiner's past decisions across all assigned art units combined and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Allowance rates may differ meaningfully between individual art units; the range (61% to 86%) reflects this variation. Aggregate statistics do not account for application-specific factors.

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 2111
413 APPS · 61% ALLOWANCE
61% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 80%
DISPOSITION250 / 163 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION24 moart unit avg 20.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility25% · art unit 22%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)79%
§103 — Obviousness83% · art unit 72%
§112 — Written description & definiteness82%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW68%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW58%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 114 decided applications with an interview and 299 without.

ART UNIT 2185
299 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE
79% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION237 / 62 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.8 moart unit avg 21.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.6 moart unit avg 36.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility19% · art unit 19%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)99%
§103 — Obviousness80% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness78%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW76%+12 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 84 decided applications with an interview and 215 without.

ART UNIT 2175
145 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

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

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 66%
DISPOSITION98 / 16 / 31allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.8 moart unit avg 22.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY29.3 moart unit avg 37.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility17% · art unit 30%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness80%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW81%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 55 decided applications with an interview and 59 without.

ART UNIT 2186
130 APPS · 81% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines computer-aided design (CAD).

81% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION105 / 25 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION14.9 moart unit avg 22.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY24.6 moart unit avg 35 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility15% · art unit 32%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness90% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness89%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW87%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW77%+10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 53 decided applications with an interview and 77 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Thomas J Cleary

  • What is Thomas J Cleary's overall allowance rate?
    72% of 956 decided applications were allowed across all art units in the examiner's record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans 4 art units within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across these art units?
    Allowance rates range from 61% to 86% across the examiner's art units.
  • Does this pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate 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 Thomas J Cleary 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: 987 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