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

Examiner Fernando Alcon

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 923 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
78%vs 68% art-unit average+10 pts
higher than about 52% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425
AU avg 68%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Examiner Fernando Alcon has allowed 718 of 923 decided applications.

718 allowed
205 abandoned
Plus 30 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Fernando Alcon maintains a public record across 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400. His pooled allowance rate stands at 78% across hundreds of decided applications. This rate reflects the share of applications in his record that were allowed, among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications. The 78% figure describes his historical record and does not constitute a prediction regarding any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units. The allowance rate is a historical statistic computed from past dispositions and describes patterns in that closed set. Pooled figures do not predict outcomes on individual applications, which depend on claim scope, prior art, and prosecution conduct. Aggregate data provides context on the examiner's past 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 2425
953 APPS · 78% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

78%
higher than about 52% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425
AU avg 68%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2425; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition923 decided applications

718 allowed
205 abandoned
Plus 30 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 16.8mo
disposed 31.5mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 18.9 mo, disposed 36.3 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
17%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
74%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 83
83%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
28%

Interview benefit

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

without
77%
+4 pts
with
81%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 209 decided applications with an interview and 714 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Fernando Alcon

  • What is Fernando Alcon's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 78% across hundreds of decided applications—the share of applications that were allowed among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications in his record.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    The pooled record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • Does this allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The allowance rate is a historical summary of past dispositions and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • What does 'hundreds of decided applications' mean?
    It indicates the magnitude of the pooled dataset—applications that have received a final disposition (allowed or abandoned), excluding pending cases.
◈ 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.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication 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 Fernando Alcon 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: 953 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