LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/TIONNA M BURKE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Tionna M Burke

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 450 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS

Examiner Tionna M Burke has allowed 243 of 450 decided applications (54%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

54% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2176 · 47%AU 2178 · 71%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Tionna M Burke maintains a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Her pooled allowance rate stands at 54% over 450 disposed applications. The allowance rate ranges from 47% to 71% across these art units, reflecting variation in outcomes between the different art units in her assigned portfolio. This aggregate figure represents her historical record of allowed and abandoned applications combined, excluding pending matters.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates results from multiple art units into one overall figure. The 54% allowance rate describes past outcomes across all assigned art units combined and reflects historical disposal patterns. This aggregate statistic does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Individual art units may have different allowance rates; the pooled rate shows the overall pattern across her entire assigned portfolio.

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 2176
311 APPS · 47% ALLOWANCE

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

47% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION145 / 166 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.3 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility37% · art unit 41%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)62%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness45%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW59%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW33%+26 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 160 decided applications with an interview and 151 without.

ART UNIT 2178
193 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE
71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION98 / 41 / 54allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION25.2 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY52.7 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility45% · art unit 36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)73%
§103 — Obviousness97% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness24%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW72%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW67%+5 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 90 decided applications with an interview and 49 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tionna M Burke

  • What is Tionna M Burke's overall allowance rate?
    Her pooled allowance rate is 54%, calculated over 450 disposed applications across all assigned art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    The public record covers 2 art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 47% to 71% across the assigned art units, indicating variation in outcomes by art unit.
◈ 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 Tionna M Burke 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: 504 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