LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER, ART UNIT, OR APPLICATION #
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Xuan Lu

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 220 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
85%vs 80% art-unit average+5 pts
higher than about 53% of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2473
AU avg 80%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2473; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 31 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 30 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Examiner Xuan Lu has allowed 186 of 220 decided applications.

186 allowed
34 abandoned
Plus 33 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Xuan Lu has a pooled allowance rate of 85% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400. This rate reflects the percentage of applications in the examiner's decided record—allowed and abandoned applications combined—excluding pending matters. The examiner works across 1 art unit. The 85% allowance rate is a factual summary of past dispositions and does not predict the outcome of any specific application.

How to read these numbers.

A pooled record aggregates data across all art units under an examiner's purview. The allowance rate describes historical dispositions—applications allowed or abandoned—and represents past performance only. Aggregate figures do not account for variation by art unit, technology, or application characteristics, and they are not predictive of outcomes in individual cases. This pooled snapshot provides context for an examiner's overall record.

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 2473
253 APPS · 85% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

85%
higher than about 53% of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2473
AU avg 80%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2473; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average, computed across all 31 examiners in the unit — a broader group than the 30 published marks, so it can sit apart from them.

Disposition220 decided applications

186 allowed
34 abandoned
Plus 33 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 21.3mo
disposed 38.8mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 22.6 mo, disposed 36.4 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 25
16%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
99%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 81
97%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
35%

Interview benefit

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

without
78%
+10 pts
with
88%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 139 decided applications with an interview and 81 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Xuan Lu

  • What is Examiner Xuan Lu's allowance rate?
    The pooled allowance rate is 85%, computed from allowed and abandoned applications across hundreds of decided matters in the examiner's record. This is a historical figure and not a prediction of any specific application.
  • How many art units does this examiner cover?
    Examiner Xuan Lu works across 1 art unit in Technology Center 2400. The allowance rate reflects a pooled record across all assigned art units.
  • What does the 'decided_tier' mean?
    The decided-application set comprises hundreds of matters. This magnitude describes the sample size underlying the allowance rate and provides context for the reliability of the pooled figure.
  • Does this rate apply to my application?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical aggregate and is not a prediction of any individual application's outcome. Actual dispositions depend on application-specific facts, claims, and prosecution history.
◈ 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 Xuan Lu 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: 253 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