LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/CAROLINE J R SOMERA
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Caroline J R Somera

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 233 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2024
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
77%vs 61% art-unit average+16 pts
higher than about 61% of the 28 examiners with published rates in art unit 2421
AU avg 61%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 28 examiners with published rates in art unit 2421; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 29 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 28 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Caroline J R Somera has allowed 180 of 233 decided applications.

180 allowed
53 abandoned
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Caroline J R Somera maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 across one art unit. Her pooled allowance rate stands at 77% across hundreds of decided applications. This rate reflects the share of applications that issued as allowed among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications in her record. The allowance rate is a historical statistic describing past dispositions and does not predict outcomes in any individual application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's performance across all her art units. The allowance rate and application volumes shown here describe her historical record and represent an average across different art units and application types. Aggregate figures are correlational snapshots of past decisions and are not predictive of the outcome in any specific, pending application. Individual art-unit records may differ from the pooled figure.

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 2421
233 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

77%
higher than about 61% of the 28 examiners with published rates in art unit 2421
AU avg 61%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 28 examiners with published rates in art unit 2421; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 29 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 28 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition233 decided applications

180 allowed
53 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 13.5mo
disposed 30.2mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 21.7 mo, disposed 40.3 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 23
23%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
65%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 84
90%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
44%

Interview benefit

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

without
61%
+31 pts
with
92%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 119 decided applications with an interview and 114 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Caroline J R Somera

  • What is Caroline J R Somera's overall allowance rate?
    Her pooled allowance rate is 77%, calculated across hundreds of decided applications (allowed and abandoned). This is a historical figure and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    This examiner's public record spans one art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the allowance rate mean?
    The allowance rate is the percentage of applications that were allowed, expressed as a share of all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned). Pending applications are excluded. It describes past outcomes only.
  • Can I use this rate to predict my application's outcome?
    No. This pooled rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any individual application. Outcomes depend on the specific claims, prior art, and examination record of each application.
◈ 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.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 Caroline J R Somera 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: 233 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