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

Examiner Edward X Long

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 215 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
76%vs 68% art-unit average+8 pts
higher than about 59% of the 34 examiners with published rates in art unit 2439
AU avg 68%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 34 examiners with published rates in art unit 2439; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 35 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 34 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Edward X Long has allowed 164 of 215 decided applications.

164 allowed
51 abandoned
Plus 35 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Edward X Long maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning 1 art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 76%, meaning that 76% of applications in the decided category (allowed and abandoned combined) were allowed. This figure represents the pooled record and reflects outcomes on applications that reached a final disposition, excluding pending matters. The allowance rate is stated as a percentage of decided applications only and does not describe the total population of filings.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates results across all art units under an examiner's jurisdiction. The overall allowance rate reflects the historical disposition of decided applications and describes past outcomes, not a prediction about any specific pending application. Art-unit assignments and case-specific factors may vary. Aggregate statistics are correlational data and do not indicate the outcome of individual matters.

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 2439
250 APPS · 76% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

76%
higher than about 59% of the 34 examiners with published rates in art unit 2439
AU avg 68%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 34 examiners with published rates in art unit 2439; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 35 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 34 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition215 decided applications

164 allowed
51 abandoned
Plus 35 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 18.8mo
disposed 34.9mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 26.9 mo, disposed 44.5 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 43
55%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
48%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 94
100%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
48%

Interview benefit

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

without
43%
+43 pts
with
86%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 166 decided applications with an interview and 49 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Edward X Long

  • What is Edward X Long's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 76% across hundreds of decided applications. This figure represents the percentage of allowed applications within the decided category (allowed plus abandoned applications), excluding pending matters.
  • How many art units does Edward X Long work in?
    The examiner's public record covers 1 art unit.
  • What does this pooled record tell me?
    The pooled record aggregates outcomes across all art units and reflects historical allowance rates on decided applications. It is a summary of past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
◈ 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.

Drafting and prosecuting patent applicationsApplication drafting, office-action responses, and prosecution strategy before the USPTO.Appeals and PTAB practiceAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.IP portfolio strategyHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Scheduling time with an attorneyFree 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 Edward X Long 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: 250 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