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

Examiner Frantz B Jean

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 1,053 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
92%vs 70% art-unit average+22 pts
higher than about 84% of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454
AU avg 70%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 58 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 57 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Frantz B Jean has allowed 967 of 1,053 decided applications.

967 allowed
Plus 31 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Frantz B Jean maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across more than a thousand decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 92%. This rate represents the percentage of applications that were allowed or abandoned, pooled across the examiner's art-unit assignments. The allowance rate reflects the examiner's historical record on decided applications and does not project outcomes on pending or future matters. Individual art units may exhibit different rates; this figure aggregates the examiner's pooled activity.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across all art units assigned to an examiner. The overall allowance rate describes historical performance on decided applications—those allowed or abandoned—and excludes pending matters. Pooled figures represent past outcomes across different technology areas and examination contexts. Such aggregated statistics do not constitute a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Applicants may review individual art-unit data separately for more granular analysis.

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 2454
1,084 APPS · 92% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

92%
higher than about 84% of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454
AU avg 70%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 58 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 57 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition1,053 decided applications

967 allowed
Plus 31 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19.6mo
disposed 29.5mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.8 mo, disposed 40.6 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 41
16%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
73%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
44%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
25%

Interview benefit

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

without
91%
+8 pts
with
99%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 146 decided applications with an interview and 907 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Frantz B Jean

  • What is Frantz B Jean's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 92% across more than a thousand decided applications in Technology Center 2400.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Frantz B Jean's public record spans one art unit.
  • What does the allowance rate measure?
    The allowance rate is the percentage of applications that were allowed or abandoned—decided applications only—and does not include pending matters. It reflects pooled historical data and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • Does the pooled rate apply to my application?
    The pooled allowance rate describes the examiner's aggregate historical record across all assigned art units. Individual applications may differ based on claim scope, prior art, and other case-specific factors. Review the art-unit-specific record for more targeted information.
◈ 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 Frantz B Jean 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: 1,084 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