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

Examiner Ayoub Alata

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 611 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
85%vs 76% art-unit average+9 pts
higher than about 58% of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2494
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2494; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 32 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 31 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Ayoub Alata has allowed 519 of 611 decided applications.

519 allowed
92 abandoned
Plus 21 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Ayoub Alata maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 85%, meaning that of all applications that have been allowed or abandoned, 85% were allowed. This rate is based on the pooled record and reflects outcomes on applications that have reached a final disposition. The figures presented are historical data and do not constitute predictions for any pending or future application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units into a single overall allowance rate. The 85% figure describes what occurred in the past and is not a prediction of what will occur on any specific application. Pooled statistics describe historical outcomes across different technologies and application types; they do not forecast individual case results or indicate how any particular examination will proceed.

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 2494
632 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

85%
higher than about 58% of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2494
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2494; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 32 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 31 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition611 decided applications

519 allowed
92 abandoned
Plus 21 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19.5mo
disposed 31.4mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 21.1 mo, disposed 36.3 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 37
31%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
79%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 88
83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
54%

Interview benefit

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

without
71%
+24 pts
with
95%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 352 decided applications with an interview and 259 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Ayoub Alata

  • What is Ayoub Alata's allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 85%, representing the percentage of applications that were allowed out of all decided (allowed or abandoned) applications in the pooled record across Technology Center 2400.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    This examiner's public record spans one art unit within TC 2400.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate tell me?
    The pooled rate describes historical outcomes across hundreds of decided applications. It is not a prediction for any specific application and does not indicate how any individual case will be examined or decided.
  • How large is the sample underlying this record?
    The allowance rate is based on hundreds of decided applications pooled across all the examiner's art units.
◈ 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.

Lynch LLP's patent practiceApplication 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 Ayoub Alata 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: 632 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