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

Examiner Eric A Myers

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 572 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
83%vs 74% art-unit average+9 pts
higher than about 56% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2474
AU avg 74%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2474; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Examiner Eric A Myers has allowed 475 of 572 decided applications.

475 allowed
97 abandoned
Plus 44 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Eric A Myers maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the allowance rate is 83%. This figure represents the share of applications in the decided category—those allowed or abandoned—and excludes pending matters. The allowance rate reflects the examiner's historical record and is not a prediction of outcomes in any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across all art units assigned to an examiner. The allowance rate shown here—83%—describes past decisions on applications that were allowed or abandoned and does not forecast the result of any particular pending application. Pooled figures offer a broad historical view; individual applications may experience different outcomes based on claim scope, prior art, and prosecution specifics.

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 2474
616 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

83%
higher than about 56% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2474
AU avg 74%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2474; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition572 decided applications

475 allowed
97 abandoned
Plus 44 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19.8mo
disposed 32.2mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.7 mo, disposed 38.7 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 25
16%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
78%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 87
78%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
79%

Interview benefit

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

without
81%
+7 pts
with
88%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 191 decided applications with an interview and 381 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Eric A Myers

  • What is Eric A Myers's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 83% across hundreds of decided applications in TC 2400. This is the share of allowed or abandoned applications and does not include pending matters.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Eric A Myers's public record spans one art unit within Technology Center 2400.
  • Does the pooled allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's disposition. Individual results depend on claim language, prior art, and prosecution history.
◈ 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.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 Eric A Myers 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: 616 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