LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/YOLANDA L WILSON
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Yolanda L Wilson

TECH CENTER 2100 · 2 ART UNITS · 1,397 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
86%vs 79% weighted peer average+7 pts

Examiner Yolanda L Wilson has allowed 1,195 of 1,397 decided applications in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

allowed1,195abandoned202pending53· pending excluded from the rate
The weighted peer average (79%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 14, 2026
AU 2113 · 86%AU 2184 · 83%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Yolanda L Wilson maintains a public record across more than a thousand decided applications in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Her pooled allowance rate stands at 86%, measured across allowed and abandoned applications in her decided caseload. The examiner's record spans 2 art units within TC 2100. This aggregate figure reflects outcomes across her full portfolio of decided cases and does not constitute a prediction for any specific application.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units within TC 2100. The 86% allowance rate reflects historical outcomes on decided applications—those allowed or abandoned—and represents the examiner's overall record to date. Aggregate statistics describe past performance across a diverse set of cases and are not predictive of outcomes in any individual application. Art-unit-specific records appear separately.

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 2113
1,438 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines error detection, correction, and monitoring.

86% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 79%
DISPOSITION1185 / 200 / 53allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION21.5 moart unit avg 21.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY33.5 moart unit avg 32.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
REJECTION RATE = SHARE OF THIS EXAMINER'S APPLICATIONS THAT DREW ≥1 OFFICE-ACTION REJECTION IN WHICH THE GROUND APPEARS

Grounds can co-occur, so the four don't sum to 100%. The art-unit figure is the unweighted mean across examiners in the art unit; §102 and §112 carry no art-unit benchmark.

§101 — Subject-matter eligibility35%art unit 37%2 pts
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)61%no art-unit benchmark
§103 — Obviousness41%art unit 66%25 pts
§112 — Written description & definiteness26%no art-unit benchmark
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW91%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW85%+6 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 67 decided applications with an interview and 1,318 without.

ART UNIT 2184
12 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines interconnection and data transfer between memory, I/O, and processing units.

83% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 78%
DISPOSITION10 / 2 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION23.5 moart unit avg 20.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY32.6 moart unit avg 31.7 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Yolanda L Wilson

  • What is Yolanda L Wilson's overall allowance rate?
    Her pooled allowance rate is 86%, calculated across all decided applications in her caseload.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans 2 art units within TC 2100.
  • What does the allowance rate measure?
    It measures the percentage of decided applications (allowed and abandoned) across her pooled caseload. Pending applications are excluded.
  • Is this rate predictive of my application's outcome?
    No. Aggregate statistics describe past outcomes and are not a prediction for any specific case.
◈ 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.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.PTAB trials and patent appealsAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Building a patent portfolioHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Booking a consultationFree 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 Yolanda L Wilson 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: 1,450 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