Examiner Devika S Maharaj has allowed 44 of 82 decided applications (54%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.
Examiner Devika S Maharaj maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 127 total applications, 82 have been disposed (allowed or abandoned). Of those 82 decided applications, 44 were allowed, yielding an allowance rate of 54%. The examiner's record spans one art unit. This pooled figure reflects outcomes across all applications in that art unit and does not constitute a prediction for any specific case.
This record is pooled across all of the examiner's art units. The allowance rate (54%) is computed from decided applications only—allowed and abandoned—and excludes pending cases. Aggregate statistics describe the historical record and are not predictions about individual applications. Different art units within TC 2100 may have different characteristics, and this pooled view combines them into one overall figure.
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 →
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.
Primarily examines neural-network / biological-model computing, and machine learning.
Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.
A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 52 decided applications with an interview and 30 without.
Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Devika S Maharaj has a public record within Technology Center 2100. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated June 25, 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: 127 applications.
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