LYNCH·LLP
HOME/EXAMINERS/TC 2400/WON JUN CHOI
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Won Jun Choi

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 35 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
69%vs 76% art-unit average7 pts
higher than about 24% of the 25 examiners with published rates in art unit 2411
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 25 examiners with published rates in art unit 2411; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Examiner Won Jun Choi has allowed 24 of 35 decided applications.

24 allowed
11 abandoned
Plus 55 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Won Jun Choi maintains a public record in Technology Center 2400, covering art unit 2411. Across dozens of decided applications, the examiner's allowance rate is 69%, calculated as the share of applications that were allowed among all decided (allowed and abandoned) applications. This figure reflects the examiner's pooled record and describes outcomes on applications already concluded in the record; it is not a prediction of any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates decisions across the examiner's art units. The 69% allowance rate is a historical aggregate—a description of past dispositions—and does not predict or determine outcomes in any individual case. Aggregate figures mask variation by art unit and technology area. Any specific application's outcome turns on its own facts, claims, prior art, and prosecution history, not on pooled statistics.

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 2411
90 APPS · 69% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

69%
higher than about 24% of the 25 examiners with published rates in art unit 2411
AU avg 76%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 25 examiners with published rates in art unit 2411; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition35 decided applications

24 allowed
11 abandoned
Plus 55 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 25.6mo
disposed 45.4mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 21 mo, disposed 38.4 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 26
20%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
89%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 86
93%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
71%
// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Won Jun Choi

  • What is Won Jun Choi's overall allowance rate?
    69%, calculated as the percentage of decided (allowed and abandoned) applications that were allowed, pooled across all art units in the examiner's record.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    One art unit (2411), all within Technology Center 2400.
  • What does the allowance rate mean for my application?
    The 69% rate is a historical aggregate of past decided applications. It does not predict the outcome of any specific application, which depends on that application's own claims, prior art, and prosecution facts.
  • How large is the sample behind these figures?
    The allowance rate is based on dozens of decided applications in the examiner's pooled record.
◈ 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.

Patent prosecution at Lynch LLPApplication 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 Won Jun Choi 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: 90 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