LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/TRACY LAUREN RAIMONDO
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Tracy Lauren Raimondo

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 71 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
87%vs 74% art-unit average+13 pts
higher than about 74% 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.

Examiner Tracy Lauren Raimondo has allowed 62 of 71 decided applications.

62 allowed
Plus 20 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Tracy Lauren Raimondo maintains a pooled allowance rate of 87% across dozens of decided applications in Technology Center 2400, art unit 2474. This allowance rate represents the share of applications that were allowed among all decided applications (allowed and abandoned combined), excluding pending matters. The examiner's record spans one art unit within the technology center. The 87% figure describes the historical record of decided applications and does not predict outcomes in any individual case.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art unit(s). The 87% allowance rate is a historical statistic reflecting past dispositions and describes the proportion of decided applications that resulted in allowance. Pooled figures do not break down by individual art unit or technology area, and they are correlational snapshots of past record—not predictive models for any future application or prosecution.

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 2474
91 APPS · 87% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

87%
higher than about 74% 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.

Disposition71 decided applications

62 allowed
Plus 20 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 27.2mo
disposed 37mo
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
14%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
59%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 87
95%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
30%

Interview benefit

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

without
83%
+17 pts
with
100%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 17 decided applications with an interview and 54 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tracy Lauren Raimondo

  • What is Tracy Lauren Raimondo's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 87% across dozens of decided applications. This represents the share of applications allowed among all decided matters (allowed and abandoned), not including pending applications.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    The public record covers one art unit: art unit 2474 within Technology Center 2400.
  • Does this allowance rate apply to my specific application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate of past decided applications and does not predict the outcome of any individual case. Each application is examined on its own merits.
  • What technology areas does this examiner handle?
    The examiner's record appears in Technology Center 2400. For detailed subject-matter scope, consult the USPTO's technology-center classification.
◈ 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.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 Tracy Lauren Raimondo 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: 91 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