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

Examiner Johnny B Aguiar

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 469 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
83%vs 59% art-unit average+24 pts
higher than about 63% of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2447
AU avg 59%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2447; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 43 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 41 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Johnny B Aguiar has allowed 391 of 469 decided applications.

391 allowed
78 abandoned
Plus 21 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Johnny B Aguiar's public record spans 1 art unit within Technology Center 2400. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 83%, meaning that of all applications resulting in either allowance or abandonment, 83% were allowed. This rate is calculated from the pooled record and reflects the examiner's historical disposition across decided cases in this art unit. The allowance rate represents a snapshot of past decisions and does not predict outcomes for any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates all decided applications across an examiner's assigned art units, presenting a single allowance rate. This aggregate figure describes the examiner's historical record and does not constitute a prediction for any individual application. Allowance rates vary by application complexity, prior art, claim scope, and applicant response strategy. The pooled rate serves as general reference data only and is not predictive of any specific prosecution outcome.

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 2447
490 APPS · 83% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

83%
higher than about 63% of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2447
AU avg 59%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 41 examiners with published rates in art unit 2447; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 43 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 41 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition469 decided applications

391 allowed
78 abandoned
Plus 21 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 16.6mo
disposed 29.1mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 22.6 mo, disposed 37.4 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 35
33%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
88%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 84
91%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
67%

Interview benefit

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

without
78%
+14 pts
with
92%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 182 decided applications with an interview and 287 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Johnny B Aguiar

  • What is Johnny B Aguiar's allowance rate?
    83%, calculated from hundreds of decided applications (allowed and abandoned cases, pooled across all art units). This is the share of decided applications that were allowed.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    1 art unit, within Technology Center 2400.
  • Does this allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The allowance rate reflects historical averages across many applications and is not a prediction of any specific case. Outcomes depend on claim language, prior art, and prosecution arguments.
  • What does 'decided applications' mean?
    Decided applications are those that have been allowed or abandoned. Pending applications are excluded from this calculation.
◈ 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.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 Johnny B Aguiar 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: 490 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