USPTO Examiner MAUST TROY A - Art Unit 2189

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19250883Cryptographically Attested, Continuously Self Learning Impact Rating System for Charitable OrganizationsJune 2025January 2026Allow700NoNo
18806718THREE-DIMENSIONAL CHARACTERIZATION METHOD OF HYDROCARBON SECONDARY MIGRATION CHANNELAugust 2024May 2025Allow920NoNo
18762538DIGITAL TWIN UTILITY TUNNEL SYSTEM BASED ON REDUCED-ORDER SIMULATION MODEL AND REAL-TIME CALIBRATION ALGORITHMJuly 2024December 2024Allow610YesNo
18723941RECORDING MEDIUM, SIMULATION DEVICE, AND CONTROL METHODJune 2024September 2025Abandon1520YesNo
18714978DETECTION AND CORRECTION OF FALSE POSITIVE CLASSIFICATIONS FROM A PRODUCT SAND DETECTION TOOLMay 2024February 2025Allow910NoNo
18407229POWER OPTIMIZATION THROUGH ORCHESTRATION AND PRIORITIZATION OF MACHINES AND FUNCTIONSJanuary 2024January 2026Allow2420NoNo
18536202SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MONITORING AN OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTDecember 2023October 2025Allow2230YesNo
18564141Product State Quantification and Remaining Life Prediction Method, and Apparatus and SystemNovember 2023June 2025Allow1920YesNo
18220113AN INTERACTIVE TOP-DOWN EMISSIONS MODEL AND METHODS OF GENERATING THEREOFJuly 2023September 2025Abandon2740NoNo
18213264Realtime Flight Simulation Using Method And System For Modeling Aerodynamic Interactions In Complex eVTOL ConfigurationsJune 2023December 2024Allow1820NoNo
18083867Floor Plan Generation for Device Visualization and UseDecember 2022April 2025Allow2810NoNo
17925079AN OPTIMIZATION SYSTEMNovember 2022January 2026Allow3900NoNo
17800892CLUSTERING METHODAugust 2022February 2026Allow4200NoNo
17848457METHOD OF SIMULATING FLUID FLOWS IN AN UNDERGROUND FORMATION COMPRISING A FRACTURE NETWORKJune 2022December 2025Allow4200YesNo
17773125LOUDSPEAKER FRAME, LOUDSPEAKER AND MOUNTING SIMULATION ANALYSIS METHOD THEREFORApril 2022December 2025Allow4400YesNo
17772556METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR DESIGNING DATACENTER FACILITIESApril 2022November 2025Allow4300NoNo
17595814TIRE FAILURE PREDICTION SYSTEM AND TIRE FAILURE PREDICTION METHODNovember 2021October 2025Allow4710NoNo
17608004DEFECT DENSITY CALCULATION METHOD, DEFECT-DENSITY CALCULATION PROGRAM, DEFECT-DENSITY CALCULATION APPARATUS, HEAT TREATMENT CONTROL SYSTEM AND MACHINING CONTROL SYSTEMNovember 2021October 2025Allow4810YesNo
17605659BOUNDARY LAYER MESH GENERATION METHOD BASED ON ANISOTROPIC VOLUME HARMONIC FIELDOctober 2021September 2025Abandon4720NoNo
17603281OPTIMIZED DESIGNING METHOD FOR LAMINATE PREFORM OF CERAMIC MATRIX COMPOSITEOctober 2021September 2025Allow4701NoNo
17449312Modeling and Simulating Material MicrostructuresSeptember 2021June 2025Allow4520NoNo
17599544METHOD AND DEVICE FOR MONITORING A MILLING PROCESSSeptember 2021April 2025Allow4200YesNo
17442449DETERMINING A LANDING ZONE IN A SUBTERRANEAN FORMATIONSeptember 2021June 2025Allow4510NoNo
17441522DRILLING SYSTEMSeptember 2021April 2025Allow4330YesNo
17478458SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COMPUTER-ASSISTED DESIGN OF INDCUTOR FOR VOLTAGED-CONTROLLED OSCILLATORSeptember 2021June 2025Allow4520NoNo
17461584Methods and Systems for Robotic Testing of Fuel Point of Sale TerminalsAugust 2021April 2025Allow4310YesNo
17411748ELASTIC STRAIN ENGINEERING OF MATERIALSAugust 2021April 2025Abandon4410YesNo
17409303Method to Recommend Design Practices that Increase the Probability of Meeting Cementing Job ObjectivesAugust 2021June 2025Allow4620YesNo
17400377COMPUTER IMPLEMENTED METHODS FOR DENTAL DESIGNAugust 2021August 2025Allow4820YesNo
17395073Container Fullness Tracking Method and SystemsAugust 2021February 2025Allow4340NoNo
17428355COMPUTER IMPLEMENTED METHODS FOR DEFINING A DENTAL RESTORATIONAugust 2021October 2025Allow5120YesNo
17386685UPDATED ENERGY CONSUMPTION PREDICTION BASED ON REAL WORLD DRIVING DATAJuly 2021September 2025Allow5020YesNo
17350582Generating Space Models And Geometry Models Using A Machine Learning System With Multi-Platform InterfacesJune 2021July 2024Allow3710YesNo
17344737Context-Based Social Agent InteractionJune 2021June 2025Allow4820YesNo
17337267SCALAR LOSS FUNCTIONS FOR MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATIONJune 2021September 2024Allow4010YesNo
17333726SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DESIGNING COMPOSITIONALLY GRADED ALLOYSMay 2021July 2025Abandon5020NoNo
17327021HISTORY-MATCHING METHODOLOGY THAT MINIMIZES NON-UNIQUENESS PROBLEM AND ENSURE SMOOTH TRANSITION FROM HISTORY TO PREDICTIONMay 2021October 2025Allow5330YesNo
17307869Construction Knowledge GraphMay 2021March 2025Allow4730YesNo
17228260SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ACCELERATING PHYSICAL SIMULATION MODELS DURING MICROELECTRONIC DEVICE FABRICATIONApril 2021December 2025Allow5630NoNo
17282648NAVIGATIONAL AIDApril 2021March 2025Allow4730YesNo
17219191METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENTLY PERFORMING DISCRETE MONTE CARLO SIMULATION ANALYSIS IN NETWORK-BASED MICROSERVICESMarch 2021October 2025Allow5530NoNo
17265435DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT DEVICE, TERMINAL DEVICE, DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAMFebruary 2021September 2024Allow4320YesNo
17142522DESIGN METHOD FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL TORTUOUS PATH FLOW ELEMENTJanuary 2021July 2025Allow5540YesNo
17255175METHOD FOR DETERMINING AN OPHTHALMIC EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEM ASSOCIATEDDecember 2020September 2025Abandon5740NoNo
17124218SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ULTRA-HIGH DIMENSIONAL HAWKES PROCESSESDecember 2020July 2025Abandon5540YesNo
17122095Personalized Vehicle Component SystemDecember 2020December 2024Abandon4830NoNo
17100473DIGITAL THERAPEUTIC FOR TREATMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF AN ONCOLOGICAL CONDITIONNovember 2020December 2024Abandon4830YesNo
17014944MODEL PARAMETER REDUCTIONS AND MODEL PARAMETER SELECTION TO OPTIMIZE EXECUTION TIME OF RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT WORKFLOWSSeptember 2020June 2025Allow5840YesNo
17014331FLOW SIMULATOR FOR GENERATING RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT WORKFLOWS AND FORECASTS BASED ON ANALYSIS OF HIGH-DIMENSIONAL PARAMETER DATA SPACESeptember 2020June 2025Allow5740YesNo
16948058DYNAMIC CURRENT MODELING IN DYNAMIC VOLTAGE DROP ANALYSISAugust 2020December 2024Allow5130YesNo
16877024THREE-DIMENSIONAL SYSTEM FOR UUV PERFORMANCEMay 2020December 2024Allow5560YesYes
16816333COUPLING A SIMULATOR AND AT LEAST ONE OTHER SIMULATORMarch 2020August 2024Allow5330YesNo
16725291SHARED GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR CREATION, CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND DELIVERY OF 3D STRUCTURE MODELSDecember 2019October 2025Allow6070YesNo
16385678METHOD FOR EVALUATING AND MONITORING FORMATION FRACTURE TREATMENT USING FLUID PRESSURE WAVESApril 2019December 2024Abandon6040NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner MAUST, TROY A.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
1
Allowed After Appeal Filing
0
(0.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(100.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
3.5%
Lower than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

Filing a Notice of Appeal can sometimes lead to allowance even before the appeal is fully briefed or decided by the PTAB. This occurs when the examiner or their supervisor reconsiders the rejection during the mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) after the appeal is filed.

In this dataset, 0.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the bottom 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is less effective here than in most other areas.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal shows limited benefit. Consider other strategies like interviews or amendments before appealing.

Examiner MAUST, TROY A - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MAUST, TROY A works in Art Unit 2189 and has examined 38 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 78.9%, this examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 48 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MAUST, TROY A's allowance rate of 78.9% places them in the 48% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has a below-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by MAUST, TROY A receive 2.58 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 75% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues more office actions than most examiners, which may indicate thorough examination or difficulty in reaching agreement with applicants.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MAUST, TROY A is 48 months. This places the examiner in the 8% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +26.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MAUST, TROY A. This interview benefit is in the 73% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews provide an above-average benefit with this examiner and are worth considering.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 32.1% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 67% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 16.7% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 18% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments compared to other examiners. You should generally plan to file an RCE or appeal rather than relying on after-final amendment entry. Per MPEP § 714.12, primary examiners have discretion in entering after-final amendments, and this examiner exercises that discretion conservatively.

Pre-Appeal Conference Effectiveness

When applicants request a pre-appeal conference (PAC) with this examiner, 200.0% result in withdrawal of the rejection or reopening of prosecution. This success rate is in the 94% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: Pre-appeal conferences are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. Before filing a full appeal brief, strongly consider requesting a PAC. The PAC provides an opportunity for the examiner and supervisory personnel to reconsider the rejection before the case proceeds to the PTAB.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 89% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 66.7% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 72% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show above-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Petitionable matters include restriction requirements (MPEP § 1002.02(c)(2)) and various procedural issues.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 13% percentile). This examiner rarely makes examiner's amendments compared to other examiners. You should expect to make all necessary claim amendments yourself through formal amendment practice.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 15% percentile). This examiner rarely issues Quayle actions compared to other examiners. Allowances typically come directly without a separate action for formal matters.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Expect multiple rounds of prosecution: This examiner issues more office actions than average. Address potential issues proactively in your initial response and consider requesting an interview early in prosecution.
  • Plan for RCE after final rejection: This examiner rarely enters after-final amendments. Budget for an RCE in your prosecution strategy if you receive a final rejection.
  • Request pre-appeal conferences: PACs are highly effective with this examiner. Before filing a full appeal brief, request a PAC to potentially resolve issues without full PTAB review.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

Not Legal Advice: The information provided in this report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with a qualified patent attorney or agent for advice specific to your situation.

No Guarantees: We do not provide any guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the statistics presented above. Patent prosecution statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data and are subject to data quality limitations, processing errors, and changes in USPTO practices over time.

Limitation of Liability: Under no circumstances will IronCrow AI be liable for any outcome, decision, or action resulting from your reliance on the statistics, analysis, or recommendations presented in this report. Past prosecution patterns do not guarantee future results.

Use at Your Own Risk: While we strive to provide accurate and useful prosecution statistics, you should independently verify any information that is material to your prosecution strategy and use your professional judgment in all patent prosecution matters.