LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/OLADIRAN GIDEON OLALEYE
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Oladiran Gideon Olaleye

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 121 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 83% art-unit average6 pts
higher than about 20% of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472
AU avg 83%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 47 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 45 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Oladiran Gideon Olaleye has allowed 93 of 121 decided applications.

93 allowed
28 abandoned
Plus 72 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Oladiran Gideon Olaleye's public record spans 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400. Across hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 77 percent. This figure represents the percentage of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned), excluding pending applications. The allowance rate reflects the examiner's historical disposition across the pooled decided-application set and does not constitute a prediction about any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates the examiner's decisions across all art units within TC 2400. The allowance rate reflects historical outcomes across the decided applications in that aggregate pool. Pooled figures describe what occurred in the past and do not predict outcomes in any individual application. Different art units may have different characteristics, and individual application outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and the examiner's examination of those specific facts.

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 2472
193 APPS · 77% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

77%
higher than about 20% of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472
AU avg 83%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 45 examiners with published rates in art unit 2472; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 47 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 45 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition121 decided applications

93 allowed
28 abandoned
Plus 72 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 25.1mo
disposed 37.5mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.3 mo, disposed 35.1 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 22
14%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
99%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
53%

Interview benefit

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

without
70%
+15 pts
with
85%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 54 decided applications with an interview and 67 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Oladiran Gideon Olaleye

  • What is Examiner Olaleye's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 77 percent across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This is the percentage of allowed applications among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications, excluding pending cases.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The examiner's public record covers 1 art unit in TC 2400.
  • What does the pooled allowance rate tell me?
    The pooled allowance rate is a historical statistic describing outcomes across all the examiner's decided applications in the technology center. It is not a prediction of the outcome of any specific application and does not account for the individual facts, claim scope, or prior art of any particular case.
◈ 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.

How the firm prosecutes patentsApplication 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 Oladiran Gideon Olaleye 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: 193 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