CTFR 17/659,365 CTFR 76107 DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This office action is responsive to the amendment received February 24, 2026. Claims 1, 16, and 20 were amended. Claims 1-20 are pending. The species under consideration in the last office action is the following: In a Formula 1 derivative, Y 1 is oxygen, Y 2 is boron (fulfilling recited statement (ii)), each X 1 to X 14 is C, R A or R B is nitrogen-containing group, R C is alkyl , and no two adjacent R A , R B or R C substituents are included that join or fuse to form a further ring. The claims that were considered to read upon this species are 1-5, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 16-20. Claims 6-8, 11, 12, and 15 were withdrawn as non-elected. Claims 1-5, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 16-20 were under consideration. Now the claims have been amended to remove alkyl as a definition for R C (in independent claim 1). Accordingly, the species last under consideration is no longer present and the examiner has selected a next species to consider. The species now under consideration is the following: In a Formula 1 derivative, Y 1 is oxygen, Y 2 is boron (fulfilling recited statement (ii)), each X 1 to X 14 is C, R A or R B is nitrogen-containing group, R C is aryl, and no two adjacent R A , R B or R C substituents are included that join or fuse to form a further ring. Claims 6-8, 11, 12, and 15 are withdrawn as non-elected. Claims 1-5, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 16-20 are under consideration. The rejection of claims 1-5, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 16-20 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subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention set forth in the last office action is withdrawn in response to the claim amendment dated February 24, 2026. The rejection of claims 1-5, 9, 13, 16, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Numata, M., Yasuda, T., & Adachi, C. (2015). High efficiency pure blue thermally activated delayed fluorescence molecules having 10 H-phenoxaborin and acridan units. Chemical Communications, 51(46), 9443-9446 set forth in the last office action is withdrawn due to the amendment dated February 24, 2026. The rejection of claims 1-5, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakano et al. (US 2018/0019415 A1) set forth in the last office action is withdrawn due to the amendment dated February 24, 2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-36 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. 07-36-01 AIA Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim 2 defines R C to include alkyl as a definition, but parent claim 1 no longer recites alkyl for R C . Accordingly, dependent claim 2 recites compounds outside the scope of the claim upon which the claim depends. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-5, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano et al. (US 2018/0019415 A1) . Regarding instant Formula I, Nakano et al. teaches organic electroluminescence devices comprising boron-containing derivatives according to Formula 1 (see abstract): PNG media_image1.png 206 266 media_image1.png Greyscale . In the formula 1, X may be O and at least one of R1 to R8 is an aryl amine electron donor (see abstract, par. 7), and Ra to Re include an aryl group (see par. 50). Regarding claim 2, as stated above, at least one of R1 to R8 is an aryl amine electron donor corresponding to an instant R A or R B and Ra to Rd may be aryl corresponding to instant R C . Regarding claim 3, the core structure of Formula 1 shown above has the required corresponding carbon atoms. Regarding claim 4, at least one of R1 to R8 is an aryl amine electron donor corresponding to an instant R A or R B . Regarding claim 5, the core structures of the above Formula 1 may have X as an oxygen atom corresponding to instant Y 1 . Regarding claim 9, at least a R C as aryl as discussed above is considered to encompass the term “aromatic” (and see par. 39). Regarding claim 10, per a Formula 1, at least example compounds 7 and X2 (see par. 117, 192) show two nitrogen-containing groups may be selected to correspond to instant R A and R B . Regarding claim 13, Formula 1 compounds discussed above correspond to the first shown chemical structure of claim 13. Regarding claim 14, per definitions within a Formula 1 compound, at least example compounds 7 and X2 (see par. 117, 192) correspond to the second shown chemical structure of claim 14 where the instant groups R 1 and R 2 bond and R 3 and R 4 bond (per R 1 to R 4 defined as R where groups form the recited “combination thereof”). Regarding the structure of independent claim 16, representative compounds of Formula 1 are taught as included in an emission layer between an anode (ITO) and a cathode (Al) (see par. 188-194) to form light emitting devices. Regarding the “consumer product” of independent claim 20, example light emitting devices include all of the recited structures. Example compounds of Formula 1 were included in an emission layer between an anode (ITO) and a cathode (Al) (see par. 188-194) to form example light emitting devices. While an example Formula 1 compound is not shown with a corresponding group as aryl with respect to instant R C , given the teachings of a defined Formula 1 compound according to Nakano et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to form compounds defined by the reference as described above wherein the resultant compound and device using the compound would also meet the limitations of the instant claims. Regarding claims 17-19, in the description of a light emitting layer, Nakano et al. teaches the light emitting layer (EML) may include “ at least one kind of the polycyclic compound represented by Formula 1” and may include known fluorescent material (see par. 135 and 140). Also, the Formula 1 material may act as a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material (TADF) (see par. 141-142). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further included a fluorescent emitting material and/or additional Formula 1 TADF emitter material in a light emitting layer in combination with a first Formula 1 compound, because Nakano et al. clearly teaches a plurality of different materials such as fluorescent emitter or additional TADF Formula 1 compound may be selected to form a light emitting layer. One would expect to achieve an operational device including materials as discussed by Nakano et al. and also meeting the limitations of the instant claims with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success. Further regarding the property terminology “is an acceptor” in claim 17, “is a sensitizer” in claim 18, and “is a fluorescent emitter” in claim 19, discussed Formula 1 compounds of Nakano et al. are clearly within recited instant Formula 1 of parent claim 16 and the office notes that if the prior art teaches identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada , 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Furthermore, where the Patent Office has reason to believe that a functional limitation asserted to be critical for establishing novelty in the claimed subject matter may, in fact, be an inherent characteristic of the prior art, it possesses the authority to require the applicant to prove that the subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess the characteristics relied on (see In re Swinehart , 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 229 (CCPA 1971). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the claim amendment deleted the previously considered species and necessitated a new rejection. Nakano et al. is considered to teach features of compounds and devices as currently claimed as discussed within the above rejection. The examiner notes that allowable subject matter/species was discussed in the previous office action, but no pending claims are limited only to the very specific species. Accordingly, no claims are listed as allowable in this office action. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 Dawn Garrett whose telephone number is (571)272-1523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday (Eastern Time). 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. /DAWN L GARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 2 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 3 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 4 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 5 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 6 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 7 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 8 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 17/659,365 Page 9 Art Unit: 1786
Prosecution Insights