LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jinsong Hu

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 143 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2010
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
87%vs 70% art-unit average+17 pts
higher than about 68% 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 Jinsong Hu has allowed 124 of 143 decided applications.

124 allowed
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Jinsong Hu's public record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner issued allowances in 87% of cases. This figure represents the share of applications that were allowed, calculated from the pool of decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined). The record reflects outcomes on applications that have reached final disposition, and does not include pending applications.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all of the examiner's decided applications across all art units under this technology center. The allowance rate is a historical figure describing past outcomes and is not predictive of the result on any individual application. Pooled statistics describe aggregate patterns and do not control for application complexity, claim scope, prior art, or other case-specific factors. Individual application outcomes depend on the substantive merits of each case.

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
143 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

87%
higher than about 68% 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.

Disposition143 decided applications

124 allowed
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 34.5mo
disposed 51mo
0
60mo
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
86%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
36%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
43%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
64%
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jinsong Hu

  • What is Jinsong Hu's allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 87%, calculated from the pool of decided applications (allowed and abandoned) across all art units in TC 2400.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • What does this pooled allowance rate tell me about my application?
    This is a historical aggregate figure and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Individual results depend on the merits of the claims, prior art, and other case-specific facts.
  • How large is the sample underlying this record?
    The allowance rate is based on hundreds 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.PTAB trials and patent appealsAppeals, inter partes review, and patent-owner defense before the PTAB.Building a patent portfolioHow a patent portfolio is sequenced and built over a multi-year horizon.Booking a consultationFree 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 Jinsong Hu 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: 143 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