LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/AUBREY H WYSZYNSKI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Aubrey H Wyszynski

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 778 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
91%vs 76% art-unit average+15 pts
higher than about 82% of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 41 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 38 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Aubrey H Wyszynski has allowed 706 of 778 decided applications.

706 allowed
Plus 49 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Aubrey H Wyszynski maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 across one art unit. The examiner's pooled allowance rate stands at 91% across hundreds of decided applications. This figure represents the share of allowed applications among all decided cases (allowed and abandoned combined), excluding pending matters. The record spans a single art unit, with all decided applications pooled into this aggregate measure.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all of the examiner's decided applications across their art unit(s). The 91% allowance rate describes past decisions and reflects the historical proportion of allowed cases. Aggregate figures do not function as predictions for any individual application. Each application is examined on its merits according to patent law and the specific facts presented.

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.1 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 2434
827 APPS · 91% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

91%
higher than about 82% of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 38 examiners with published rates in art unit 2434; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 41 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 38 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition778 decided applications

706 allowed
Plus 49 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 21.9mo
disposed 32.8mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 26.5 mo, disposed 41.8 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 39
35%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
78%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 86
65%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
29%

Interview benefit

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

without
88%
+11 pts
with
99%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 163 decided applications with an interview and 615 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Aubrey H Wyszynski

  • What is Aubrey H Wyszynski's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 91%, calculated across hundreds of decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined).
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The record spans one art unit. The pooled statistics aggregate all decisions within that unit.
  • What does the allowance rate measure?
    The allowance rate is the percentage of decided applications that resulted in allowance, excluding pending cases. It reflects historical outcomes only and is not a prediction for any specific application.
  • What subject matter does this examiner handle?
    The examiner works in Technology Center 2400, as indicated in the official record.
◈ 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.

Drafting and prosecuting patent applicationsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Work before the Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Planning a patent portfolio over timeHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.The firm's consultation optionsFree 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 Aubrey H Wyszynski 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: 827 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