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

Examiner Darren B Schwartz

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 1,193 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
87%vs 75% art-unit average+12 pts
higher than about 61% of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2435
AU avg 75%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2435; 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 Darren B Schwartz has allowed 1,038 of 1,193 decided applications.

1,038 allowed
Plus 14 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Darren B Schwartz maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400, spanning 1 art unit. Across more than a thousand decided applications, his allowance rate is 87%. This figure represents the percentage of applications in his pooled record that resulted in allowance, out of all decided applications (allowed and abandoned). The allowance rate reflects outcomes on applications that have reached a final disposition and does not include pending applications.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates decisions across all art units where the examiner has worked. The 87% allowance rate describes his historical outcomes on decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Aggregate figures mask variation by art unit and applicant circumstances. The record shows past dispositions only; individual application results depend on claim scope, prior art, and prosecution history.

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 2435
1,207 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

87%
higher than about 61% of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2435
AU avg 75%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2435; 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.

Disposition1,193 decided applications

1,038 allowed
Plus 14 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19.5mo
disposed 27.6mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 25.8 mo, disposed 41.4 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 37
56%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
63%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 78
88%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
65%

Interview benefit

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

without
49%
+47 pts
with
96%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 973 decided applications with an interview and 220 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Darren B Schwartz

  • What is Darren B Schwartz's overall allowance rate?
    His allowance rate is 87% across more than a thousand decided applications pooled across all art units in TC 2400.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record spans 1 art unit.
  • Does the pooled allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The pooled rate describes past decided applications in aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • What does the allowance rate include and exclude?
    The rate is the percentage of applications that were allowed, out of all decided applications (allowed and abandoned). 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.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 Darren B Schwartz 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: 1,207 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