LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/WILSON W TSUI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Wilson W Tsui

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 644 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 Wilson W Tsui has allowed 391 of 644 decided applications (61%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

61% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2178 · 54%AU 2172 · 86%AU 2145 · 68%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Wilson W Tsui maintains a public record across three art units within Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Over 644 disposed applications, he issued allowances in 391 cases, yielding an overall allowance rate of 61%. The allowance rate across his individual art units ranges from 54% to 86%, reflecting variation in outcomes within TC 2100. Of the 707 total applications in his record, 253 were abandoned. This pooled figure describes his historical record and does not predict any specific application's outcome.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates Examiner Tsui's record across multiple art units in TC 2100. The 61% allowance rate reflects decisions on 644 disposed applications—a historical summary, not a forecast. The 54% to 86% range shows that allowance rates vary among his individual art units. Pooled figures describe past outcomes and cannot be applied to predict results in any particular case or art unit.

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 2178
492 APPS · 54% ALLOWANCE
54% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 54%
DISPOSITION264 / 228 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.9 moart unit avg 25.5 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY50 moart unit avg 41.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility55% · art unit 36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)47%
§103 — Obviousness96% · art unit 79%
§112 — Written description & definiteness60%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW79%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW16%+63 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 295 decided applications with an interview and 197 without.

ART UNIT 2172
193 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE
86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION112 / 18 / 63allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.9 moart unit avg 24.2 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY34.4 moart unit avg 44.7 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility61% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)41%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness58%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW93%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW72%+21 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 87 decided applications with an interview and 43 without.

ART UNIT 2145
22 APPS · 68% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines artificial-intelligence and machine-learning methods.

68% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 53%
DISPOSITION15 / 7 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION16.4 moart unit avg 26.9 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY28.9 moart unit avg 45.3 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility18% · art unit 42%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)18%
§103 — Obviousness86% · art unit 93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness91%

Based on 22 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Wilson W Tsui

  • What is Wilson W Tsui's overall allowance rate?
    61%, based on 391 allowances among 644 decided applications in his pooled record across all art units.
  • How many art units does Examiner Tsui cover?
    Three art units (2145, 2172, 2178) within Technology Center 2100.
  • Do allowance rates vary across Examiner Tsui's art units?
    Yes. The allowance rate ranges from 54% to 86% across his individual art units. The pooled rate of 61% aggregates these variations.
  • Does the 61% allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. This is a historical aggregate and does not predict any specific 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 Wilson W Tsui 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: 707 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