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

Examiner Jose M Mesa

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 780 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
77%vs 72% art-unit average+5 pts
higher than 9 of the 16 examiners with published rates in art unit 2484
AU avg 72%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 16 examiners with published rates in art unit 2484; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Examiner Jose M Mesa has allowed 602 of 780 decided applications.

602 allowed
178 abandoned
Plus 34 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Jose M Mesa maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 spanning one art unit. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 77%. This figure represents the percentage of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined), and does not include pending applications. The record reflects outcomes pooled across all of the examiner's assigned art units.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates data across all art units where the examiner has decided applications. The allowance rate of 77% describes the historical distribution of allowed and abandoned outcomes in decided cases. Aggregate figures reflect past record and are not predictions about any individual application's outcome. An allowance rate does not indicate how any specific case will be examined or decided.

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 2484
814 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

77%
higher than 9 of the 16 examiners with published rates in art unit 2484
AU avg 72%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 16 examiners with published rates in art unit 2484; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition780 decided applications

602 allowed
178 abandoned
Plus 34 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 17.8mo
disposed 29.7mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 20.4 mo, disposed 34.5 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 24
38%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
83%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 77
87%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
45%

Interview benefit

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

without
76%
+6 pts
with
82%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 172 decided applications with an interview and 608 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Jose M Mesa

  • What is Jose M Mesa's overall allowance rate?
    The allowance rate is 77%, calculated from all allowed and abandoned applications across all art units. This does not include pending applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record spans one art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the allowance rate mean for my application?
    The allowance rate describes past outcomes across hundreds of decided cases. It is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • How large is the sample behind this allowance rate?
    The record 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.

Lynch LLP's patent practiceApplication 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 Jose M Mesa 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: 814 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