LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/PRINCE AKWASI MENSAH
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Prince Akwasi Mensah

TECH CENTER 2400 · 2 ART UNITS · 567 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 2 ART UNITS
79%vs 74% weighted peer average+5 pts

Examiner Prince Akwasi Mensah has allowed 447 of 567 decided applications.

447 allowed
120 abandoned
Plus 57 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
The weighted peer average (74%) is each art unit's average below, weighted by this examiner's applications in it (2 art units).
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026
AU 2474 · 79%AU 2416 · 0%

What the data says.reading this examiner

Prince Akwasi Mensah maintains a pooled allowance rate of 79% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. His public record spans two art units within TC 2400. The allowance rate reflects the percentage of his decided applications—those allowed or abandoned—and describes his historical record across the combined set of art units in which he has worked. This aggregate figure is a summary of past decisions and does not characterize the disposition of any individual pending application.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across multiple art units, presenting a single allowance rate that combines different subject-matter areas. This aggregate figure describes past outcomes across the examiner's full art-unit portfolio and is not a prediction for any specific application. When reviewing a pooled profile, note that the overall rate masks variation that may exist within individual art units, which are reported separately elsewhere on this page.

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 2474
623 APPS · 79% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

79%
higher than about 44% of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2474
AU avg 74%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 27 examiners with published rates in art unit 2474; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition566 decided applications

447 allowed
119 abandoned
Plus 57 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 21.4mo
disposed 39.1mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.7 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 25
20%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
43%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 87
95%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
37%

Interview benefit

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

without
74%
+13 pts
with
87%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 233 decided applications with an interview and 333 without.

ART UNIT 2416
1 APPS · 0% ALLOWANCE · LIMITED DATA

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

0%
higher than about 0% of the 144 examiners with published rates in art unit 2416
AU avg 58%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 144 examiners with published rates in art unit 2416; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 146 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 144 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition1 decided applications

1 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 33.8mo
disposed 41.5mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 33.2 mo, disposed 47.8 mo.
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Prince Akwasi Mensah

  • What is Prince Akwasi Mensah's overall allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 79% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This figure reflects allowed and abandoned applications and does not include pending matters.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Prince Akwasi Mensah's public record covers 2 art units within TC 2400. The figures shown here represent his pooled record across both units.
  • Does the pooled allowance rate apply to my application?
    No. The pooled rate is a historical summary and is not a prediction of outcome for any specific application. Individual art units may have different allowance rates, shown in the per-art-unit section of this page.
◈ 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 Prince Akwasi Mensah 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: 624 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