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

Examiner Jayesh M Jhaveri

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 723 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
87%vs 64% art-unit average+23 pts
higher than about 84% of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2433
AU avg 64%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2433; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 32 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 31 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Jayesh M Jhaveri has allowed 627 of 723 decided applications.

627 allowed
Plus 23 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Jayesh M Jhaveri maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner has issued allowances in 87% of cases. This figure represents the share of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined), excluding pending matters. The record reflects examination activity pooled across the examiner's art-unit assignment and is presented as a historical aggregate rather than a predictor of outcomes in any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

This profile aggregates the examiner's examination record across all assigned art units within TC 2400. The allowance rate shown is a pooled historical figure—the ratio of allowed to decided applications across that entire body of work. Pooled data combines different art units and subject areas, so the aggregate rate describes past outcomes in the aggregate and is not a prediction applicable to any individual application or submission.

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 2433
746 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

87%
higher than about 84% of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2433
AU avg 64%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 31 examiners with published rates in art unit 2433; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 32 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 31 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition723 decided applications

627 allowed
Plus 23 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 18.7mo
disposed 28mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 26.2 mo, disposed 41.6 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
31%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
85%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 86
89%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
41%

Interview benefit

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

without
67%
+30 pts
with
97%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 477 decided applications with an interview and 246 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jayesh M Jhaveri

  • What is Jayesh M Jhaveri's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 87% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This represents the percentage of applications allowed among all decided cases (allowed and abandoned), excluding pending applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    This public record spans one art unit within Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate mean?
    The pooled rate aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's assigned art units. It describes historical outcomes in the aggregate and is not a prediction of the outcome in any specific application.
  • Does this rate apply to my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's disposition. Each application is examined individually on its merits.
◈ 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 Jayesh M Jhaveri 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: 746 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