USPTO Examiner MALDONADO STEVEN - Art Unit 3797

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
18991054SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MEASURING PULSE WAVE VELOCITYDecember 2024September 2025Allow920YesNo
18206284WIRELESS MEDICAL LOCATION TRACKINGJune 2023February 2026Allow3311YesNo
18020012METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR FACILITATING HEALING OR INHIBITING DEVELOPMENT OF A PULMONARY OR THROMBOSIS AILMENTFebruary 2023October 2025Abandon3220YesNo
18017607METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR TRACKING OF ACOUSTIC VIBRATIONS USING OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHYJanuary 2023February 2026Allow3720NoNo
18069877SEMI-COMPACT PHOTOACOUSTIC DEVICES AND SYSTEMSDecember 2022March 2026Allow3940NoNo
18071734SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR THE DETECTION OF DENTAL ANOMALIES USING MILLIMETER WAVE ANTENNANovember 2022April 2025Abandon2810NoNo
18058854SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PATIENT MONITORINGNovember 2022July 2025Allow4220YesNo
17918366APPARATUS FOR DETECTION OF PERIPHERAL NERVE STIMULATIONOctober 2022July 2025Abandon3320NoNo
17916154CONTROLLER AND METHOD FOR INDUCTIVE SENSINGSeptember 2022January 2026Abandon4030NoNo
17802761FIDUCIAL TRACKING KNEE BRACE DEVICE AND METHODS THEREOFAugust 2022October 2025Abandon3811NoNo
17858160FORM FACTORS FOR ULTRASONIC IMAGING AND NEURO-MODULATIONJuly 2022December 2024Abandon2901NoNo
17858143ULTRASOUND FOR NEURO-IMAGING AND NEURO-MODULATION DEVICE IN A SINGLE DEVICEJuly 2022November 2024Abandon2910NoNo
17858325QUANTITATIVE METHOD FOR TARGET AND DOSE TRACKING IN RESPONSE TO TRANSCRANIAL NEURO-MODULATIONJuly 2022November 2024Abandon2910NoNo
17590153DIRECTIONAL-DEVICE INTRABODY PLACEMENT SYSTEMS AND RELATED METHODSFebruary 2022August 2025Abandon4221NoNo
17558642Tracker-Based Surgical NavigationDecember 2021October 2025Allow4631YesNo
17377982DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING CATHETER AND DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING APPARATUSJuly 2021March 2025Allow4421YesNo
17350396KNEE IMAGING CO-REGISTRATION DEVICES AND METHODSJune 2021November 2024Abandon4101NoNo
17292020Augmented Reality Guidance for Surgical Procedures with Adjustment of Scale, Convergence and Focal Plane or Focal Point of Virtual DataMay 2021June 2025Abandon4920NoNo
17291526METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR SURGICAL NAVIGATION AND DEVICES FOR SURGERYMay 2021August 2024Abandon4010NoNo
17278334MEDICAL OBSERVATION SYSTEM, MEDICAL OBSERVATION APPARATUS, AND MEDICAL OBSERVATION METHODMarch 2021July 2025Abandon5221NoNo

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 MALDONADO, STEVEN - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner MALDONADO, STEVEN works in Art Unit 3797 and has examined 6 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 33.3%, this examiner allows applications at a lower rate than most examiners at the USPTO. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 46 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner MALDONADO, STEVEN's allowance rate of 33.3% places them in the 5% 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 MALDONADO, STEVEN receive 1.67 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 34% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by MALDONADO, STEVEN is 46 months. This places the examiner in the 12% 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 +100.0% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by MALDONADO, STEVEN. This interview benefit is in the 100% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 50.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 98% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs are highly effective with this examiner compared to others. If you receive a final rejection, filing an RCE with substantive amendments or arguments has a strong likelihood of success.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 0.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 4% 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.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 49% percentile). This examiner makes examiner's amendments less often than average. You may need to make most claim amendments yourself.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 51% percentile). This examiner issues Quayle actions more often than average when claims are allowable but formal matters remain (MPEP § 714.14).

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.
  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • 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.
  • RCEs are effective: This examiner has a high allowance rate after RCE compared to others. If you receive a final rejection and have substantive amendments or arguments, an RCE is likely to be successful.
  • 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.