LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/VINCENT GONZALES
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Vincent Gonzales

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 600 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Vincent Gonzales has allowed 480 of 600 decided applications (80%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

80% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2124 · 84%AU 2122 · 70%AU 2129 · 75%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Vincent Gonzales maintains a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 600 disposed applications, his allowance rate is 80%. This rate reflects decided applications—those allowed or abandoned—and does not include pending filings. The allowance rate ranges from 70% to 84% across his art units, indicating variation in disposition patterns by subject matter within the technology center.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units and reflects the examiner's historical dispositions. An aggregate allowance rate describes past decisions across a portfolio of applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Cross-art-unit records show that allowance rates may differ by art unit, and the range provided reflects that variation in the examiner's record.

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 2124
431 APPS · 84% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

84% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 64%
DISPOSITION330 / 62 / 39allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.7 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY41.9 moart unit avg 41.8 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility66% · art unit 61%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)47%
§103 — Obviousness84% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness56%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW89%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW80%+9 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 174 decided applications with an interview and 218 without.

ART UNIT 2122
132 APPS · 70% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

70% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION93 / 39 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.4 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY42 moart unit avg 39.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility57% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)48%
§103 — Obviousness92% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness43%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW67%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW71%-4 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 15 decided applications with an interview and 117 without.

ART UNIT 2129
76 APPS · 75% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.

75% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION57 / 19 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION31.7 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY44.2 moart unit avg 42.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility43% · art unit 63%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)43%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness71%
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Vincent Gonzales

  • What is Vincent Gonzales's overall allowance rate?
    80%, calculated from 600 disposed applications (allowed and abandoned combined) across all art units.
  • How many art units does his record span?
    Three art units: 2122, 2124, and 2129, all within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across his art units?
    Allowance rates range from 70% to 84% across the art units in his record.
  • Does this pooled record predict the outcome of my application?
    No. Historical aggregate data describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of any individual application's outcome.
◈ 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 Vincent Gonzales 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: 639 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