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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communication filed on January 16, 2026.
Claims 30, 34, 38, 54 and 56 have been amended and are hereby entered.
Claim 49 has been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected process for preparing a compound, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on September 2, 2025.
Claims 30 – 48 and 50 – 57 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is made FINAL.
Response to Amendments
Applicant's amendments, filed January 16, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the objection of claims 38 and 54 as set forth in the office action filed September 18, 2025.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed January 16, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 30 – 48 and 50 – 57 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention as set forth in the office action filed September 18, 2025.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed January 16, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 30, 31, 33 – 38, 40, 44 – 47 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ‘058 as set forth in the office action filed September 18, 2025.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed January 16, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 30 – 32, 34 – 42 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Duab as set forth in the office action filed September 18, 2025.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed January 16, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 39, 41, 42, and 51 – 57 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘058 as set forth in the office action filed September 18, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 30 – 48 and 50 – 57 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 33 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.
Claim 33 recites that the Z groups are CR1. However, this is the same as the definition for Z in claim 30, upon which claim 33 is dependent. Therefore, claim 33 fails to further limit the subject matter 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 30, 31, 33 – 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 44 – 47 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li (US20220033420A1).
As per claims 30, 31, 33 – 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 44 – 47, Li teaches:
Compound of Formula (I)
PNG
media_image1.png
214
244
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Li teaches intermediate compound a-3
PNG
media_image2.png
190
216
media_image2.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed Formula wherein one Y is NAr0 and the remaining Y are CAr1; Z is CR1; Ar1 is H; two R0 radicals are joined to one another and form a spiro compound; R1 is H; Ar0 is substituted by an A group conforming to formula (A)
PNG
media_image3.png
90
144
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, wherein ArL is a heteroaromatic ring system which has 6 heteroaromatic ring atoms; ET is an electron transporting group selected from electron-deficient heteroaromatic groups having 5 aromatic ring atoms, namely a group represented by Formula ET-3 in claim 38 and n is 1. The compound reads on Formula I-B in claim 44 wherein W is CR1; k is 0. This compound reads on Formula IV-B in claim 46.)
As per claim 51, Li teaches:
Formulation comprising at least one compound and one solvent (In the reaction step for a-3, the compound is reacted in a solvent of BuLi.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 32, 36, 39, 42, 43, 48, 50, 52 – 57 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As per claims 32, 36, 39, 42, 43, 48, 50, 52 – 57, ‘058, previously cited, is considered relevant to the claimed invention. While ‘058 teaches compounds with the fused polycyclic core and the claimed electron transporting groups, ‘058 requires an amine group substitution, which is no longer part of the definitions for the R groups in Formula (I).
As per claims 32, 36, 39, 42, 43, 48, 50, 52 – 57, Daub, previously cited, is considered relevant to the claimed invention. While Daub teaches compounds with the fused polycyclic core and the claimed electron transporting groups, Daub requires that the benzol ring of the condensed unit must contain a N-atom which is outside the definition of Z in Formula (I) as currently amended.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated any 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA N CHANDHOK whose telephone number is (571)272-5780. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 6:30 - 3:30.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached on (571) 270-7692. 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.
/JENNA N CHANDHOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789