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

Examiner Tyler J Schallhorn

TECH CENTER 2100 · 4 ART UNITS · 271 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 Tyler J Schallhorn has allowed 95 of 271 decided applications (35%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

35% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2176 · 29%AU 2177 · 35%AU 2144 · 58%AU 2178 · 37%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Tyler J Schallhorn's public record spans four art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 271 decided applications, the examiner issued allowances in 95 cases, resulting in an overall allowance rate of 35%. The allowance rate varies across the examiner's art units, ranging from 29% to 58%. This pooled figure represents the examiner's aggregate record and does not describe the rate for any single art unit or predict outcomes in individual applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's record across multiple art units in TC 2100. The overall allowance rate (35% of 271 decided applications) reflects a pooled average and does not apply uniformly to each art unit. The stated range (29% to 58%) shows variation across individual units. These historical statistics describe past decisions and are not predictions about any specific application's outcome.

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
137 APPS · 29% ALLOWANCE

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

29% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 59%
DISPOSITION40 / 97 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21 moart unit avg 23.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY57 moart unit avg 40.5 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility57% · art unit 41%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)92%
§103 — Obviousness99% · art unit 87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness59%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW31%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW25%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 86 decided applications with an interview and 51 without.

ART UNIT 2177
74 APPS · 35% ALLOWANCE
35% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION26 / 48 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION33.5 moart unit avg 22.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY68.3 moart unit avg 40.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility29% · art unit 40%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)48%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW36%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW35%+1 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 28 decided applications with an interview and 46 without.

ART UNIT 2144
61 APPS · 58% ALLOWANCE
58% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION19 / 14 / 28allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION30.3 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY55 moart unit avg 41.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility72% · art unit 45%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)98%
§103 — Obviousness98% · art unit 92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness54%
ART UNIT 2178
27 APPS · 37% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA
37% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION10 / 17 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION37 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.7 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility0% · art unit 36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)100%
§103 — Obviousness0% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%

Based on 27 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tyler J Schallhorn

  • What is Examiner Schallhorn's overall allowance rate?
    35% across 271 decided applications pooled from all art units in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does Examiner Schallhorn cover?
    Four art units (2144, 2176, 2177, 2178) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Does the allowance rate vary across art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 29% to 58% across the examiner's art units with substantial records.
  • What does the pooled record represent?
    The aggregate of past decisions across all four art units. It is a historical summary and not a prediction for any individual 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 Tyler J Schallhorn 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: 299 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