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

Examiner Berhanu Shitayewoldetsadi

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 435 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
86%vs 59% art-unit average+27 pts
higher than about 78% of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2455
AU avg 59%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2455; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 42 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 41 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Berhanu Shitayewoldetsadi has allowed 373 of 435 decided applications.

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

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Berhanu Shitayewoldetsadi maintains a pooled allowance rate of 86% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This rate represents the percentage of applications in the examiner's record that were allowed or abandoned, relative to all decided applications. The examiner's public record spans a single art unit within the technology center. The 86% allowance rate is based on the examiner's aggregated decided-application record and describes the past distribution of outcomes without reference to any specific pending application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's performance across all assigned art units. Allowance rates describe historical outcomes and are correlational, not predictive. An aggregate figure reflects past decisions on a diverse set of applications and does not predict the outcome of any individual case. To understand how the examiner performs within specific technology areas, review the per-art-unit data, which breaks the record by individual art unit.

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 2455
457 APPS · 86% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

86%
higher than about 78% of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2455
AU avg 59%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2455; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 42 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 41 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition435 decided applications

373 allowed
62 abandoned
Plus 22 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 18.1mo
disposed 34.2mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 24.1 mo, disposed 41.5 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 38
36%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
90%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
98%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
47%

Interview benefit

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

without
70%
+22 pts
with
92%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 313 decided applications with an interview and 122 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Berhanu Shitayewoldetsadi

  • What is Examiner Shitayewoldetsadi's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 86%, representing the percentage of allowed or abandoned applications among all decided applications across the examiner's record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • Does the overall allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The overall allowance rate describes the examiner's past record and is not a prediction of any specific pending application. Outcomes depend on the particular facts, claims, and art relevant to each case.
  • How large is the sample underlying this rate?
    The pooled allowance rate is based on hundreds of decided applications across all of the examiner's assigned 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.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication 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 Berhanu Shitayewoldetsadi 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: 457 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