LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/WILBERT L STARKS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Wilbert L Starks

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 1,180 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 Wilbert L Starks has allowed 949 of 1,180 decided applications (80%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

80% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2122 · 82%AU 2129 · 77%AU 2121 · 86%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Wilbert L Starks maintains a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 1,180 disposed applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 80%, meaning 949 applications were allowed and 231 abandoned. The allowance rate across the three art units ranges from 77% to 86%. This pooled figure aggregates results from Art Units 2121, 2122, and 2129 and describes the examiner's historical record without predicting outcomes in any individual case.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record combines allowance rates from multiple art units into a single aggregate figure. The 80% rate shown here reflects the total allowed and abandoned applications across all three art units the examiner works in within TC 2100. The range of 77% to 86% indicates variation among individual art units but does not predict performance on any specific application. Pooled data describes past outcomes and is correlational, not predictive.

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 2122
767 APPS · 82% ALLOWANCE

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

82% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 55%
DISPOSITION579 / 128 / 60allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION26.5 moart unit avg 27.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY40.1 moart unit avg 39.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness24% · art unit 83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness16%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW74%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW84%-10 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 130 decided applications with an interview and 577 without.

ART UNIT 2129
424 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

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

77% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 65%
DISPOSITION328 / 96 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.1 moart unit avg 28.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY45.5 moart unit avg 42.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility10% · art unit 63%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)79%
§103 — Obviousness14% · art unit 75%
§112 — Written description & definiteness0%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW93%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW75%+18 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 56 decided applications with an interview and 368 without.

ART UNIT 2121
49 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION42 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION27.9 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.7 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Wilbert L Starks

  • What is Wilbert L Starks's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 80%, calculated over 1,180 decided applications (949 allowed, 231 abandoned) across all art units in TC 2100. This is a historical aggregate and does not predict any individual application's outcome.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Wilbert L Starks works across three art units (2121, 2122, 2129) within Technology Center 2100. The pooled record aggregates results from all three.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 77% to 86% across the three art units, indicating variation in historical outcomes by art unit. The pooled rate of 80% is a combined figure across all units.
  • Does this record predict how my application will be examined?
    No. These figures describe the examiner's past record only. They are not predictive of any specific application's outcome and do not indicate how any individual case will be handled.
◈ 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 Wilbert L Starks 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: 1,240 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