LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/WILLIAM S POWERS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner William S Powers

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 55 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
58%vs 67% art-unit average9 pts

Examiner William S Powers has allowed 32 of 55 decided applications in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

allowed32abandoned23pending0· pending excluded from the rate
DATA UPDATED JULY 14, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

William S Powers maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across dozens of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 58%. This figure represents the share of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined), excluding pending cases. The examiner's record spans a single art unit within TC 2100. The allowance rate is presented as a historical statistic of decided outcomes and does not constitute a prediction for any future application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's performance across all assigned art units within TC 2100. Aggregate allowance rates describe past decisions on a body of applications and reflect historical outcomes only. Such figures are correlational summaries, not predictive tools for individual cases. Individual applications vary in claim scope, specification, prior art, and examination history. A pooled rate does not determine or forecast the outcome of any specific application.

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 2134
55 APPS · 58% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines network security, and computer and data security.

58% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 67%
DISPOSITION32 / 23 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION40.2 moart unit avg 35.6 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY54.5 moart unit avg 50.7 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner William S Powers

  • What is William S Powers' overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 58% across dozens of decided applications in TC 2100. This is the percentage of applications that received allowance among all decided cases (allowed and abandoned), with pending applications excluded.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 1 art unit within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security).
  • What does this allowance rate mean for my application?
    The pooled allowance rate describes historical outcomes only and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual cases depend on claim language, specification, prior art, and examination details.
  • Does the 58% rate apply to all applications in TC 2100?
    No. This 58% figure is specific to William S Powers' decided applications. The technology center as a whole may have different aggregate statistics.
◈ HOW LYNCH LLP CAN HELP

Where to go next.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. These are general resources about the firm's services — not advice about this examiner or any specific application.

Drafting and prosecuting patent applicationsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Work before the Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Planning a patent portfolio over timeHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.The firm's consultation optionsFree and paid consultation options across the firm's attorneys.
◈ 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 William S Powers 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 July 14, 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: 55 applications.

Rejection rates. Each §-rate is the share of this examiner's applications that drew at least one office-action rejection in which that statutory ground appears; applications with no rejection on record are excluded, and because grounds can co-occur the four do not sum to 100%. The art-unit figure beside each is the unweighted mean of the per-examiner rates across the art unit, published for §101 and §103 only. Beside the overall allowance rate we show a benchmark: for a single-art-unit examiner it is exactly that art unit's average, labeled “art-unit average”; for an examiner spanning several art units it is the “weighted peer average” — the per-art-unit averages, weighted by this examiner's application count in each — labeled distinctly because it is a blended figure, not any single art unit's average. Both are built from the same per-art-unit averages the panels show.

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