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 without traverse of Group I (drawn to an organic thin film, an organic electroluminescence material, an organic thin film solar cell material, a photoelectric transducer material, a thin film transistor material, and a coating composition each comprising a hexahydropyrimidopyrimidine compound having a structure of a formula (1)) and Species A (an organic electroluminescence device material) in the reply filed on 12/30/2025 was previously acknowledged.
The elected group and species are encompassed by claims 1-16, 23-24, and 28.
Claims 18-22 and 25-27 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/20/2025.
Response to Amendment
The applicant's amendment of 07/01/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 4, 6-9, 11, 14-16, and 23-24 are amended, claim 17 is cancelled and claim 28 is new due to the applicant's amendment.
Claims 1-16 and 18-28 are pending and claims 18-22 and 25-27 are withdrawn from consideration.
The objection to claim 11, 14-16, and 23-24 as set forth in the previous Office action is overcome due to the applicant's amendment.
The rejection of claims 4-10 and 15-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention as set forth in the previous Office action is overcome due to the applicant's amendment.
The rejection of claims 1-10, 15-16, and 28 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukagawa et al. WO-2016181705-A1 in view of Schwamm et al. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81, 7612−7625 as set forth in the previous Office action.
The rejection of claims 11-14 and 23-24 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukagawa et al. WO-2016181705-A1 in view of Schwamm et al. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81, 7612−7625 as set forth in the previous Office action is overcome due to the applicant's amendment.
However, as outlined below, new grounds of rejection have been made under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments on page 12 of the reply dated 07/01/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-10, 15-16, and 28 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukagawa et al. WO-2016181705-A1 in view of Schwamm et al. J. Org. Chem. 2016, 81, 7612−7625 as set forth in the previous Office action have been fully considered and are persuasive with respect to the applicant's arguments of unexpected results. The rejection has been withdrawn.
However, as outlined below, new grounds of rejection have been made under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-16, 23-24, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, 11, 23, and 24, each of the claims recite "an optionally substituted aromatic heterocyclic group other than a pyridine ring." However, there is no recitation in the specification of wherein R1 is an optionally substituted aromatic heterocyclic group other than a pyridine ring. Published specification paragraph [0153] recites that example of the aromatic heterocyclic group includes one aromatic heterocyclic ring, such as thiophene, furan, pyrrole, oxazole, oxadiazole, thiazole, thiadiazole, imidazole, pyridine, pyrimidine, pyrazine, or triazine, and combinations thereof and exemplary compounds in published specification paragraph [0161] show a subset of these groups. However, it is unclear where there is support for the new subgroup "optionally substituted aromatic heterocyclic group other than a pyridine ring", for example, wherein the heterocyclic group is quinazoline. Consequently, it is unclear that Applicant had possession at the time of filing the claimed invention wherein R1 is an optionally substituted aromatic heterocyclic group other than a pyridine ring outside the scope of thiophene, furan, pyrrole, oxazole, oxadiazole, thiazole, thiadiazole, imidazole, pyrimidine, pyrazine, or triazine, and combinations thereof.
Claims 2-10, 15-16, and 28 are dependent on claim 1 and therefore, for the reasons outlined above with respect to claim 1, these claims also contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 12-14 are dependent on claim 11 and therefore, for the reasons outlined above with respect to claim 11, these claims also contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Fukagawa et al.WO-2021045020-A1 teaches a charge generation layer comprising guanidine compounds, among others (Abstract), and discloses guanidine compounds including Py-hpp2
PNG
media_image1.png
139
161
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 18).
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth M. Dahlburg whose telephone number is 571-272-6424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET, and alternate Fridays.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/ELIZABETH M. DAHLBURG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights