LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/YUK TING CHOI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Yuk Ting Choi

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 708 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 Yuk Ting Choi has allowed 511 of 708 decided applications (72%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

72% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2164 · 73%AU 2153 · 71%AU 2169 · 100%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Yuk Ting Choi maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security) spanning three art units. Across 708 decided applications, the examiner allowed 511, yielding a 72% allowance rate. The record is pooled across art units 2153, 2164, and 2169. Allowance rates across these art units range from 71% to 73%, reflecting consistency in the overall dispositioned record. This figure describes decided cases only and excludes pending applications.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates examination activity across multiple art units into a single historical profile. The allowance rate—72% of 708 decided applications—reflects past dispositions and does not predict the outcome of any specific application. Range figures (71% to 73%) show variation among the art units within the examiner's portfolio but do not identify which art unit produced which rate. Pooled data provides context for an examiner's historical record across their assignment areas.

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 2164
493 APPS · 73% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

73% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 62%
DISPOSITION331 / 124 / 38allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.9 moart unit avg 22.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY38.8 moart unit avg 43.4 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility73% · art unit 58%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)70%
§103 — Obviousness94% · art unit 88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness27%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW88%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW54%+34 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 257 decided applications with an interview and 198 without.

ART UNIT 2153
250 APPS · 71% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

71% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION177 / 73 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION22.2 moart unit avg 27.7 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.8 moart unit avg 41.6 mo
// REJECTION PROFILE
§101 — Subject-matter eligibility80% · art unit 54%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)78%
§103 — Obviousness91% · art unit 77%
§112 — Written description & definiteness40%
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW80%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW58%+22 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 148 decided applications with an interview and 102 without.

ART UNIT 2169
3 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

100% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 47%
DISPOSITION3 / 0 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION28.6 moart unit avg 24.8 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY39.4 moart unit avg 40 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Yuk Ting Choi

  • What is Yuk Ting Choi's overall allowance rate?
    72%, calculated from 511 allowed applications out of 708 decided applications across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Three art units (2153, 2164, 2169) within TC 2100.
  • What is the range of allowance rates across the examiner's art units?
    Allowance rates range from 71% to 73% across these art units.
  • Does the pooled rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The 72% rate is a historical summary of 708 decided cases and is not a prediction for any specific pending application.
◈ 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 Yuk Ting Choi 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: 746 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