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

Examiner Thomas R Peeso

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 394 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION APR 2010
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT

Examiner Thomas R Peeso has allowed 366 of 394 decided applications (93%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

93% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Thomas R Peeso maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across one art unit, the examiner has disposed of 394 applications. Of those decided applications, 366 were allowed and 28 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 93%. This rate reflects the examiner's pooled record across all assigned art units and describes outcomes in past applications only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's record across all art units in TC 2100. The allowance rate of 93% is a historical aggregate—a summary of past dispositions—and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Pooled figures mask variation across individual art units and case types. The public record describes what occurred in closed cases, not what will occur in any pending matter.

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 2132
394 APPS · 93% ALLOWANCE

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

93% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 72%
DISPOSITION366 / 28 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION33.7 moart unit avg 27.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.6 moart unit avg 41 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Thomas R Peeso

  • What is Thomas R Peeso's overall allowance rate?
    93%, based on 366 allowed applications out of 394 total disposed applications in the examiner's pooled record.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    One art unit. This record is pooled across all assigned art units in TC 2100.
  • What does this allowance rate tell me about my application?
    The rate is a historical aggregate of past dispositions. It is not a prediction of the outcome of any specific application and does not account for differences in application type, claims, or examiner assignment.
  • How many applications has this examiner decided?
    394 applications have been disposed of. Of those, 366 were allowed and 28 were abandoned.
◈ 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 R Peeso 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: 394 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