LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/JORGE L ORTIZ CRIADO
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Jorge L Ortiz Criado

TECH CENTER 2400 · 2 ART UNITS · 69 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
1%vs 43% weighted peer average42 pts

Examiner Jorge L Ortiz Criado has allowed 1 of 69 decided applications.

68 abandoned
Plus 4 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
The weighted peer average (43%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026
AU 2489 · 0%AU 2496 · 9%

What the data says.reading this examiner

Jorge L Ortiz Criado maintains a public record across 2 art units within Technology Center 2400. His pooled allowance rate stands at 1% across dozens of decided applications. This rate reflects the share of allowed applications within his total of decided (allowed and abandoned) cases, pooled across all art units under his examination. The record encompasses applications in multiple art units, with aggregate figures representing historical outcomes rather than predictions for any individual application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates Examiner Ortiz Criado's decisions across 2 art units. The allowance rate presented is a historical aggregate and describes past outcomes only—it is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome. Pooled figures can mask variation between individual art units; applicants may review per-art-unit detail separately to understand differences in examination patterns by specific unit.

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.2 art units

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 2489
58 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

0%
higher than about 0% of the 21 examiners with published rates in art unit 2489
AU avg 36%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 21 examiners with published rates in art unit 2489; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition58 decided applications

58 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 25.5mo
disposed 35.5mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 24.4 mo, disposed 38.7 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 26
21%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
82%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 87
95%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
64%
ART UNIT 2496
15 APPS · 9% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

9%
higher than about 6% of the 34 examiners with published rates in art unit 2496
AU avg 67%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 34 examiners with published rates in art unit 2496; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 35 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 34 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition11 decided applications

10 abandoned
Plus 4 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 22.9mo
disposed 41.4mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 21.6 mo, disposed 36.2 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 43
43%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
93%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 91
93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
71%

Based on 15 applications — too small a sample to characterize the rejection mix reliably; shown for completeness.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jorge L Ortiz Criado

  • What is this examiner's overall allowance rate?
    Across dozens of decided applications pooled across all art units, Examiner Ortiz Criado's allowance rate is 1%.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    This examiner's record spans 2 art units (2489 and 2496) within Technology Center 2400.
  • What does a pooled allowance rate represent?
    The pooled rate aggregates outcomes across all art units and reflects the historical share of allowed applications among all decided (allowed and abandoned) cases. It is not a prediction for any specific application.
  • Why does this record cover multiple art units?
    Examiners in Technology Center 2400 may examine applications across multiple art units. This pooled figure shows the combined record; per-art-unit breakdowns are available separately.
◈ 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.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 Jorge L Ortiz Criado 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: 73 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