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

Examiner Eric P Smith

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 68 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2015
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
79%vs 82% art-unit average3 pts
higher than about 23% of the 26 examiners with published rates in art unit 2469
AU avg 82%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 26 examiners with published rates in art unit 2469; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 27 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 26 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Eric P Smith has allowed 54 of 68 decided applications.

54 allowed
14 abandoned
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Eric P Smith maintains a pooled allowance rate of 79% across dozens of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This rate represents the percentage of applications in his public record that were allowed, out of all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined). The examiner's record spans a single art unit. The allowance rate is a historical statistic of past dispositions and does not predict outcomes in any individual application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units. The allowance rate describes past dispositions and reflects the examiner's overall record to date. Pooled figures do not constitute predictions about any specific application, nor do they account for differences in application complexity, claim scope, or prior art across distinct art units. Historical rates are descriptive 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 2469
68 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

79%
higher than about 23% of the 26 examiners with published rates in art unit 2469
AU avg 82%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 26 examiners with published rates in art unit 2469; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 27 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 26 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition68 decided applications

54 allowed
14 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 20mo
disposed 30.8mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 20.9 mo, disposed 34.8 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 24
25%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
72%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 90
98%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
85%

Interview benefit

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

without
74%
+9 pts
with
83%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 41 decided applications with an interview and 27 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Eric P Smith

  • What is Eric P Smith's allowance rate?
    His allowance rate is 79%, calculated as a share of decided applications (allowed and abandoned) in his pooled public record across all art units.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Eric P Smith's public record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate represent?
    The pooled rate is a historical aggregate of past dispositions across all the examiner's art units. It describes what has occurred, not what will occur in any pending or future application.
  • How large is the sample behind this rate?
    The allowance rate is based on dozens of decided applications pooled across all art units.
◈ 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.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 P Smith 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: 68 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