LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/TSION B OWENS
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Tsion B Owens

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 848 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
90%vs 74% art-unit average+16 pts
higher than 17 of the 19 examiners with published rates in art unit 2487
AU avg 74%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 19 examiners with published rates in art unit 2487; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 20 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 19 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Tsion B Owens has allowed 762 of 848 decided applications.

762 allowed
Plus 52 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Tsion B Owens has a public record in Technology Center 2400 across 1 art unit. The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 90% across hundreds of decided applications. This rate represents the share of applications that were allowed among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications in the examiner's pooled record. The 90% figure reflects outcomes on applications that reached a final disposition; pending applications are excluded from this calculation.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units in TC 2400. The 90% allowance rate describes historical outcomes and is not a prediction of any specific application's result. Pooled figures mask variation across individual art units and application types. This data reflects past decisions and does not indicate how any particular 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 2487
900 APPS · 90% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

90%
higher than 17 of the 19 examiners with published rates in art unit 2487
AU avg 74%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 19 examiners with published rates in art unit 2487; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 20 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 19 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition848 decided applications

762 allowed
Plus 52 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 16.3mo
disposed 26.2mo
0
36mo
Art-unit average: first action 18.7 mo, disposed 34.3 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
27%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
41%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 77
59%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
20%

Interview benefit

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

without
88%
+7 pts
with
95%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 223 decided applications with an interview and 625 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tsion B Owens

  • What is Tsion B Owens's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's pooled allowance rate is 90%, representing applications allowed among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications across hundreds of cases.
  • How many art units does this examiner work in?
    Tsion B Owens works in 1 art unit within Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the pooled rate cover?
    The 90% pooled rate aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units. It does not include pending applications and is not a prediction for any individual case.
  • Can I use this rate to predict my application's outcome?
    No. Pooled historical rates are not predictions of specific application outcomes. Individual results depend on claim scope, prior art, and examination circumstances unique to each 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.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 Tsion B Owens 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: 900 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