LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2100/ZOILA E CABRERA
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Zoila E Cabrera

TECH CENTER 2100 · 3 ART UNITS · 231 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 3 ART UNITS

Examiner Zoila E Cabrera has allowed 175 of 231 decided applications (76%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

76% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
AU 2125 · 79%AU 2123 · 52%AU 2121 · 50%
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Examiner Zoila E Cabrera maintains a public record across three art units in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Of 231 disposed applications, 175 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 76%. The examiner's work spans art units 2121, 2123, and 2125. Allowance rates vary across these art units, ranging from 52% to 79%. This pooled figure reflects the examiner's combined record and does not isolate performance within any single art unit.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates an examiner's activity across multiple art units, presenting an overall allowance rate rather than unit-specific figures. The 76% rate describes past dispositions—allowed and abandoned applications—and is historical data only. It is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Allowance rates vary by art unit; this aggregate masks that variation. Pooled records are useful for understanding broad patterns but do not forecast individual case results.

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 2125
202 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

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

79% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 75%
DISPOSITION160 / 42 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION17.3 moart unit avg 26.4 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY30.1 moart unit avg 39 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

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

WITH INTERVIEW95%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW75%+20 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 40 decided applications with an interview and 162 without.

ART UNIT 2123
27 APPS · 52% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

52% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 51%
DISPOSITION14 / 13 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION19.9 moart unit avg 29.3 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY36.7 moart unit avg 43.8 mo
ART UNIT 2121
2 APPS · 50% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

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

50% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 57%
DISPOSITION1 / 1 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION6.5 moart unit avg 27 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY13.4 moart unit avg 39.9 mo
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Zoila E Cabrera

  • What is Examiner Cabrera's overall allowance rate?
    76%, based on 175 allowed applications out of 231 disposed applications in the pooled record across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Three art units: 2121, 2123, and 2125, all within TC 2100.
  • Do allowance rates differ across the examiner's art units?
    Yes. Allowance rates across the examiner's art units range from 52% to 79%. The pooled 76% is an aggregate and does not represent any single unit.
  • What does this pooled record mean for my application?
    The pooled rate is historical data and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual results depend on the facts of each case, the art unit assigned, and other prosecution factors.
◈ 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 Zoila E Cabrera 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: 231 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