LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/ASTEWAYE GETTU ZEWEDE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Astewaye Gettu Zewede

TECH CENTER 2400 · 2 ART UNITS · 57 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
82%vs 66% weighted peer average+16 pts

Examiner Astewaye Gettu Zewede has allowed 47 of 57 decided applications.

47 allowed
10 abandoned
Plus 25 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
The weighted peer average (66%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026
AU 2481 · 82%AU 2482 · 100%

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Astewaye Gettu Zewede holds a public record across 2 art units in Technology Center 2400. Across dozens of decided applications, the examiner issued allowances in 82% of cases where applications were either allowed or abandoned. This allowance rate represents the examiner's pooled disposition history and reflects the aggregate outcome of applications examined across both art units. The record does not indicate pending applications and covers only those applications with final dispositions.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates applications across multiple art units within the same technology center. The 82% allowance rate describes past outcomes across all decided applications in the combined record and is not a prediction about any specific application. Pooled figures mask variation that may exist among individual art units; per-art-unit detail is available separately. Historical rates reflect past examination activity and do not forecast results in any particular case.

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 →

The record, art unit by art unit.2 art units

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 2481
81 APPS · 82% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

82%
higher than about 71% of the 24 examiners with published rates in art unit 2481
AU avg 66%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 24 examiners with published rates in art unit 2481; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition56 decided applications

46 allowed
10 abandoned
Plus 25 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 17.5mo
disposed 30.9mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 24.5 mo, disposed 40.2 mo.

Rejection groundsexaminer ● vs art-unit average ○

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 eligibility
AU 24
17%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
61%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 84
92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
35%

Interview benefit

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

without
66%
+34 pts
with
100%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 27 decided applications with an interview and 29 without.

ART UNIT 2482
1 APPS · 100% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

100%
higher than about 86% of the 35 examiners with published rates in art unit 2482
AU avg 66%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 35 examiners with published rates in art unit 2482; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 45 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 35 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition1 decided applications

1 allowed
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 16.7mo
0
24mo
Art-unit average: first action 21.7 mo, disposed 38.4 mo.

Rejection groundsexaminer ● vs art-unit average ○

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 eligibility
AU 13
0%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
0%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 79
100%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
0%

Based on 1 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Astewaye Gettu Zewede

  • What is Examiner Zewede's overall allowance rate?
    Across dozens of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 82%, meaning allowances represent 82% of applications that were either allowed or abandoned.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    This pooled record spans 2 art units (2481, 2482) within Technology Center 2400.
  • Does the pooled rate apply to my specific application?
    No. The pooled rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual art-unit rates may differ from the pooled figure.
  • What does the allowance rate measure?
    The allowance rate measures the percentage of decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) in which the examiner issued an allowance. Pending applications are excluded.
◈ 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.

Patent prosecution at Lynch LLPApplication 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 Astewaye Gettu Zewede has a public record within Technology Center 2400. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated July 22, 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: 82 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