USPTO Examiner MAHARAJH MICHAEL A - Art Unit 2944

Examiner Information

Name: MAHARAJH, MICHAEL A
Art Unit: 2944
Total Cases: 1
Last Active: April 2025

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
29999904PELVIC FLOOR MUSCLE TRAINERApril 2025January 2026Allow900NoNo
29991928Adult ToyMarch 2025November 2025Allow900NoNo
29990851COMPONENT FOR ADULT TOYFebruary 2025January 2026Allow1100NoNo
29989107THERAPEUTIC DEVICEFebruary 2025November 2025Allow900NoNo
29987016GUA SHA MASSAGERJanuary 2025December 2025Allow1100NoNo
29985645Adult ToyJanuary 2025November 2025Allow1010NoNo
29981509VIBRATION MASSAGERDecember 2024January 2026Allow1300NoNo
29981502VIBRATION MASSAGERDecember 2024January 2026Allow1300NoNo
29980543LEG MASSAGERDecember 2024December 2025Allow1200NoNo
29980305NECK MASSAGERDecember 2024December 2025Allow1200NoNo
29978565Collapsible foot spa with massagerDecember 2024December 2025Allow1200NoNo
29976709Electronic Muscle StimulatorDecember 2024December 2025Allow1200NoNo
29967045SCRAPING BOARDOctober 2024December 2025Allow1400NoNo
29967046SCRAPING BOARDOctober 2024December 2025Allow1400NoNo
29961573Stimulation DeviceSeptember 2024December 2025Allow1500NoNo
29956189PERCUSSIVE MASSAGE DEVICEAugust 2024November 2025Allow1500NoNo
29956183PERCUSSIVE MASSAGE DEVICEAugust 2024November 2025Allow1500NoNo
29954976MASSAGE DEVICEJuly 2024September 2025Allow1400NoNo
29951541Sexual Device HolderJuly 2024December 2025Allow1700NoNo
29951449Beauty deviceJuly 2024December 2025Allow1710NoNo
29950855MASSAGERJuly 2024December 2025Allow1800NoNo
29949675Massage DeviceJune 2024December 2025Allow1800NoNo
29947629Muscle StimulatorJune 2024October 2025Allow1600NoNo
29947534MassagerJune 2024November 2025Allow1700NoNo
29944154Sex ToyMay 2024December 2025Allow1901NoNo
29940659MASSAGE DEVICEMay 2024October 2025Allow1800NoNo
29937612MASSAGE DEVICEApril 2024November 2025Allow1900NoNo
29936916SKIN CARE DEVICEApril 2024December 2025Allow2000NoNo
29936619GAMING MACHINEApril 2024October 2025Allow1800NoNo
29936260Pelvic Muscle TrainerApril 2024September 2025Allow1700NoNo
29934567MASSAGERMarch 2024October 2025Allow1900NoNo
29933418Percussion MassagerMarch 2024September 2025Allow1800NoNo
29933419Percussion MassagerMarch 2024September 2025Allow1800NoNo
29929884Gua Sha MassagerFebruary 2024September 2025Allow1900NoNo
29929149Massage ApplianceFebruary 2024December 2025Allow2210NoNo
29928444CLITORAL STIMULATION DEVICEFebruary 2024August 2025Allow1900NoNo
29916974VibratorNovember 2023November 2025Allow2400NoNo
29912036PERCUSSIVE THERAPY APPLICATORSeptember 2023October 2025Allow2510NoNo
29802935MassagerAugust 2021June 2023Abandon2210NoNo

Appeals Overview

No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.

Examiner MAHARAJH, MICHAEL A - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MAHARAJH, MICHAEL A works in Art Unit 2944 and has examined 1 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 0.0%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 22 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MAHARAJH, MICHAEL A's allowance rate of 0.0% places them in the 0% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner is less likely to allow applications than most examiners at the USPTO.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by MAHARAJH, MICHAEL A receive 1.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 9% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues significantly fewer office actions than most examiners.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MAHARAJH, MICHAEL A is 22 months. This places the examiner in the 90% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications move through prosecution relatively quickly with this examiner.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 40.0% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 31% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions show below-average success regarding this examiner's actions. Ensure you have a strong procedural basis before filing.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 32% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments less often than average. You may need to make most claim amendments yourself.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

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

  • Prepare for rigorous examination: With a below-average allowance rate, ensure your application has strong written description and enablement support. Consider filing a continuation if you need to add new matter.

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.