Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/406,741

ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT COMPOUND AND ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT DEVICE COMPRISING THE SAME

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 19, 2021
Examiner
KRUER, KEVIN R
Art Unit
1787
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Rohm And Haas Electronic Materials Korea Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
27%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 7m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 27% of cases
27%
Career Allow Rate
212 granted / 798 resolved
-38.4% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 7m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
853
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
51.3%
+11.3% vs TC avg
§102
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§112
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 798 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of the species of compound C-72 in the reply filed on 2/24/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims contain compounds that all are obvious variants of one another that share a common chemical structure. To the extent applicant is admitting the inventions are obvious variants and if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, applicant admits the other inventions are unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a, said argument is persuasive. All non-obvious species remain restricted from the present application. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Said copy was received 9/15/2021. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered. Initialed copies of said IDSs are enclosed herein. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 2 and 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itoi (US 2018/0287062) in view of Nakamura et al (US 2015/0171356). Itoi teaches the following material: PNG media_image1.png 147 267 media_image1.png Greyscale Itoi teaches AR1, AR2, may comprise biphenyl (0040) and R3 may comprise a phenyl groups (0043). While Itoi does not explicitly teaches the amine and fluorenyl groups should be connected at the 2 and 9 carbon positions as in the elected species, said positions would be at once envisioned by one of ordinary skill in the art given the limited number of combinations of carbon positions encompassed by the formula disclosed in Itoi. Itoi is relied upon as above, but does not teach that the middle fluorenyl group may comprise a sulfur in the middle ring (i.e. be a dibenzothiophene). However, Nakamura teaches an electroluminescent compound wherein a dibenzothiophene is bonded to an amine (see formula I wherein Ar1, Ar2, or Ar3 is dibenzothiophene). Nakamura teaches the dibenzothiophene gives the compound a large energy gap which is suitable for confiding exciton energy (0046) providing a high luminous efficiency whereby transportation of holes and transportation of electrons can be conducted in well-balanced manner and emission of two or more emitting layers can be conducted in a well-balanced manner. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize a dibenzothiophene in place of the fluorenyl group of Itoi linked to the amine. The motivation for doing so would have been to obtain a large energy gap which is suitable for confiding exciton energy (0046) providing a high luminous efficiency whereby transportation of holes and transportation of electrons can be conducted in well-balanced manner and emission of two or more emitting layers can be conducted in a well-balanced manner. With regards to claim 2, the resulting compound reads on compound (1-3). With regards to claim 4, said claim does not require any of the substituted components. Said claim merely limits the substituents that may be present if a substituted component is present. With regards to claim 5, the resulting compound reads on C-72. With regards to claim 6, Itoi teaches an organic electroluminescent material comprising the claimed organic electroluminescent compound (0005). With regards to claim 7, Itoi teaches an organic electroluminescent device comprising the claimed organic electroluminescent compound (0056). With regards to claim 8, Itoi teaches an organic electroluminescent device wherein the organic electroluminescent compound is comprised in a hole transport zone (0004). With regards to claim 9, CN teaches the hole transport zone comprises may comprise at least one of a p-doped hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, and a light-emitting auxiliary layer (0004). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103 With regards to the rejection of claims 2 and 4-9 under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being assertedly unpatentable over Itoi (US 2018/0287062) in view of Nakamura et al. (US 2015/0171356), Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of Itoi and Nakamura et al. does not teach or suggest Applicant’s claimed organic electroluminescent compounds or associated organic electroluminescent materials and organic electroluminescent devices. Specifically, Applicant acknowledges Itoi discloses the compound of Formula 1 as noted in the Office Action but that the reference further defines the associated invention as being represented by Formula 2-1 or Formula 2-2 (30047) and places emphasis on how the linked-amine group and the ‘second fluorenyl group are displaced about the ‘first fluorenyl’ group and the importance of the described symmetrical positioning is further borne out in the reference by each of the specific compounds disclosed at [0053]-[0055]. Said argument is noted but is not persuasive as a reference may be relied upon for all that it fairly teaches and is not limited to the preferred embodiments disclosed therein. While Itoi teaches the “the carbon position at which the amine group is linked by a linker at one (e.g., a first) fluorenyl group and the carbon position at which another (e.g., a second) fluorenyl group is substituted (e.g., a second fluorenyl group is substituted into the first fluorenyl group) may be (emphasis added) symmetrically positioned,” the teachings of Itoi is not limited to such embodiments. For the reasons noted above, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the claims are rejected for the reasons set forth herein. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R KRUER whose telephone number is (571)272-1510. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Callie Shosho can be reached at (571) 272-1123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KEVIN R KRUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 19, 2021
Application Filed
Jun 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 13, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12550643
NOVEL OXIDANTS AND STRAINED-RING PRECURSORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12546012
Zn-PLATED HOT STAMPED PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12528977
Magnetic Adhesive for Use on Skin
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12503630
ORGANOPOLYSILOXANE COMPOSITION HAVING PRESSURE-SENSITIVE ADHESIVE LAYER FORMATION PROPERTIES, AND USE OF SAID COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12473460
CROSSLINKED POLYOLEFIN RESIN FOAM, ADHESIVE TAPE, LAYERED BODY, MOLDING, AND DISPLAY MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
27%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+29.6%)
4y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 798 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month