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

Examiner Edemio Navas Jr

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 608 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
74%vs 57% art-unit average+17 pts
higher than about 69% of the 29 examiners with published rates in art unit 2483
AU avg 57%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 29 examiners with published rates in art unit 2483; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 30 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 29 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Edemio Navas Jr has allowed 452 of 608 decided applications.

452 allowed
156 abandoned
Plus 51 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Edemio Navas Jr maintains a pooled allowance rate of 74% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400, spanning a single art unit. The allowance rate reflects the proportion of decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined) that issued as allowed, excluding pending matters. This public record aggregates all examined applications within the examiner's assigned art unit and represents the historical outcome distribution without prediction of any specific application's disposition.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates outcomes across all art units assigned to an examiner. The allowance rate shown here describes past examination outcomes and reflects the historical proportion of allowed decisions among all decided applications. Aggregate figures do not predict outcomes in individual applications, which vary based on claim scope, prior art, and applicant responses. The pooled data provides context for the examiner's overall record only.

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 2483
659 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

74%
higher than about 69% of the 29 examiners with published rates in art unit 2483
AU avg 57%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 29 examiners with published rates in art unit 2483; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 30 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 29 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition608 decided applications

452 allowed
156 abandoned
Plus 51 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19mo
disposed 33.8mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 25.9 mo, disposed 42.2 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 22
13%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
62%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 79
92%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
46%

Interview benefit

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

without
68%
+20 pts
with
88%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 187 decided applications with an interview and 421 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Edemio Navas Jr

  • What is Edemio Navas Jr's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 74%, calculated from all decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across the examiner's assigned art units. This figure excludes pending applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record spans one art unit. The pooled figures aggregate all applications examined within that assignment.
  • Does the allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate describes historical outcomes and is not a prediction of any specific application's disposition. Individual applications depend on claim language, prior art, and examination responses.
  • What subject matter does this examiner examine?
    The examiner works in Technology Center 2400. Specific art-unit assignments and subject-matter detail appear in the separate art-unit section of this page.
◈ 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.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 Edemio Navas Jr 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: 659 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