LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/TSUNG YIN WU
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Tsung Yin Wu

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 143 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUN 2019
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
56%vs 70% art-unit average14 pts
higher than about 21% of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454
AU avg 70%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 58 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 57 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Tsung Yin Wu has allowed 80 of 143 decided applications.

80 allowed
63 abandoned
No applications pending.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Tsung Yin Wu maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400 across one art unit. Over hundreds of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate stands at 56%. This rate represents the percentage of applications in the examiner's pooled record that issued as allowed, calculated from the total of allowed and abandoned applications. The allowance rate does not include pending applications. This pooled figure aggregates the examiner's complete decided record across all art units.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates all decided applications across an examiner's art units into a single historical figure. The 56% allowance rate describes what occurred in past applications and reflects the examiner's overall disposition across the combined set. This aggregate does not forecast the outcome of any individual application or predict how the examiner will act on a specific submission. Applicants may also review art-unit-specific records, which appear separately.

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 2454
143 APPS · 56% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

56%
higher than about 21% of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454
AU avg 70%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 57 examiners with published rates in art unit 2454; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 58 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 57 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition143 decided applications

80 allowed
63 abandoned
No applications pending.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 21.2mo
disposed 53mo
0
60mo
Art-unit average: first action 23.8 mo, disposed 40.6 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 41
40%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
68%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 82
98%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
50%

Interview benefit

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

without
33%
+39 pts
with
72%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 83 decided applications with an interview and 60 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Tsung Yin Wu

  • What is Examiner Tsung Yin Wu's overall allowance rate?
    The examiner's allowance rate is 56% across hundreds of decided applications in the pooled record.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    This pooled record spans one art unit in Technology Center 2400.
  • Does the allowance rate predict the outcome of my application?
    No. The allowance rate is a historical summary of decided applications and is not a prediction of any specific application's outcome.
  • What does the allowance rate include?
    The rate is calculated from allowed and abandoned applications only; pending applications are excluded from the calculation.
◈ 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 Tsung Yin Wu 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: 143 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