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

Examiner Zhaohui Yang

TECH CENTER 2400 · 1 ART UNIT · 434 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION JUL 2026
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT
74%vs 61% art-unit average+13 pts
higher than about 47% of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2468
AU avg 61%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2468; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Examiner Zhaohui Yang has allowed 321 of 434 decided applications.

321 allowed
113 abandoned
Plus 61 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.
DATA UPDATED JULY 22, 2026

What the data says.reading this examiner

Examiner Zhaohui Yang maintains a public record across one art unit within Technology Center 2400. His pooled allowance rate is 74%, calculated across hundreds of decided applications—those marked allowed or abandoned. This rate reflects the share of decided cases that resulted in allowance. The 74% figure represents his historical record in this technology center and does not forecast outcomes for any particular pending application. An allowance rate describes past dispositions and is not a prediction of future results.

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all decided applications across the examiner's art units. Aggregate allowance rates describe historical performance and are not predictive of any individual application's outcome. A pooled figure masks variation across different art units and different applicants' claim scope, prosecution approach, and specification. Pooled data is descriptive only—it shows what occurred in the past, not what will occur in a specific case.

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 2468
495 APPS · 74% ALLOWANCE

Allowance ratewhere this examiner sits among peers

74%
higher than about 47% of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2468
AU avg 61%
0%
100%
Each short mark is one of the 30 examiners with published rates in art unit 2468; the dot is this examiner. The tick is the art-unit average.

Disposition434 decided applications

321 allowed
113 abandoned
Plus 61 applications still pending — not yet decided, so excluded from the rate.

Pendencymonths from filing

filed
first action 19.2mo
disposed 37.5mo
0
48mo
Art-unit average: first action 26.4 mo, disposed 41.5 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 21
17%
§102 — Anticipation (novelty)
no AU benchmark
85%
§103 — Obviousness
AU 89
98%
§112 — Written description & definiteness
no AU benchmark
43%

Interview benefit

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

without
68%
+12 pts
with
80%

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 209 decided applications with an interview and 225 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Zhaohui Yang

  • What is Examiner Yang's allowance rate?
    His pooled allowance rate is 74% across hundreds of decided applications in Technology Center 2400.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    This pooled record covers one art unit. The data combines all decided applications within that unit.
  • Does this allowance rate predict my application's outcome?
    No. The pooled allowance rate is a historical summary and is not a prediction of any specific application's result. Individual outcomes depend on claim scope, prior art, and specification factors unique to each case.
  • What does 'decided applications' mean?
    Decided applications are those marked allowed or abandoned. Pending applications are excluded from the allowance-rate 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.

Lynch LLP's patent practiceApplication 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 Zhaohui Yang 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: 495 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