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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 21, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communication filed on May 21, 2026.
Claims 7, 8, 15, and 18 – 20 have been amended and are hereby entered.
Claim 2 has been cancelled previously.
Claims 1 and 3 – 21 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed May 21, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 7, 8, and 18 – 21 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 April 8, 2026.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed May 21, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 15 – 18, 20 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoon as set forth in the office action filed April 8, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that Dopant 56 of Yoon does not read on claim 15 as currently amended. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown below, previously cited Compound 167 of Yoon reads on the compounds of claim 15 as currently amended.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3 – 21 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(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 3 – 21 are rejected 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.
Claims 1 and 15 contain Formula A-2, which shows substituent R as (R)n. However, in the claims, n is not defined. This renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how many R groups are allowed or whether R groups are required or not.
Claims 3 – 14 and 16 – 19 are rejected as being dependent on claims 1 and 15.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 15 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoon (WO2020138874A1).
As per claim 15, Yoon teaches:
A polycyclic aromatic compound represented by the following Formula A-1
PNG
media_image1.png
184
244
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Yoon teaches compound 167
PNG
media_image2.png
112
114
media_image2.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed Formula wherein X is B; Y is O; Z is CR6 wherein one R6 are hydrogen and Q1 and Q2 are both a substituted C6 aromatic hydrocarbon ring.)
As per claims 16 and 17, Yoon teaches:
An organic light emitting device comprising a first electrode, a second electrode facing the first electrode, an organic layer interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the organic layer comprises at least one of an electron injection layer, an electron transport layer, a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an electron blocking layer, a hole blocking layer, and a light emitting layer, wherein at least one of the layer comprises the polycyclic aromatic compound (Yoon teaches the fabrication of exemplary OLEDS in [291 – 294] and describes that an anode is formed and then sequentially a HIL, HTL, EBL, EML, HBL, EIL and a cathode were formed. In Example 13, Dopant 167 is used in the light emitting layer.)
As per claims 18 and 19, Yoon teaches:
Wherein the light-emitting layer comprises an anthracene derivative represented by Formula C as a host compound
PNG
media_image3.png
182
220
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(In Example 4, as described in paragraph [297 – 298], Dopant 167 is used with Host 1
PNG
media_image4.png
170
102
media_image4.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed Formula wherein R21 to R28 are hydrogen; Ar9 is a substituted C10 aryl group, namely a group represented by Formula C-1
PNG
media_image5.png
102
122
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein R32 and R31 are bonded to form an aromatic polycyclic ring; Ar10 is a C10 arylene group; L13 is a single bond; k is an integer of 1.)
Claims 15 – 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seda (US20190214579A1).
As per claim 15, Seda teaches:
A polycyclic aromatic compound represented by the following Formula A-1
PNG
media_image1.png
184
244
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Seda teaches compound 1
PNG
media_image6.png
204
286
media_image6.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed Formula wherein X is B; Y is S; Z is CR6 wherein R6 are hydrogen and Q1 and Q2 are both a substituted C6 aromatic hydrocarbon ring.)
As per claims 16 and 17, Seda teaches:
An organic light emitting device comprising a first electrode, a second electrode facing the first electrode, an organic layer interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the organic layer comprises at least one of an electron injection layer, an electron transport layer, a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an electron blocking layer, a hole blocking layer, and a light emitting layer, wherein at least one of the layer comprises the polycyclic aromatic compound (Seda teaches the fabrication of exemplary OLEDS in [0391 – 0396] and describes that an anode is formed and then sequentially a HIL, HTL1, HTL2, EML, ETL, EIL and a cathode were formed. In Example 1, Compound 1 is used in the light emitting layer.)
As per claims 18 and 19, Seda teaches:
Wherein the light-emitting layer comprises an anthracene derivative represented by Formula C as a host compound
PNG
media_image3.png
182
220
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(In Example 1, as described in paragraph [0391 – 0396], Compound 1 is used with host material BH-1
PNG
media_image7.png
156
310
media_image7.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed Formula wherein R21 to R28 are hydrogen; Ar9 is a substituted C10 aryl group, namely a group represented by Formula C-1
PNG
media_image5.png
102
122
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein R32 and R31 are bonded to form an aromatic polycyclic ring; Ar10 is a C10 arylene group; L13 is a C6 arylene group; k is an integer of 1.)
As per claim 20, Seda teaches:
A polycyclic aromatic compound represented by [Formula A-1]
PNG
media_image8.png
174
162
media_image8.png
Greyscale
(Seda teaches compound 1
PNG
media_image6.png
204
286
media_image6.png
Greyscale
, which reads on the claimed Formula wherein X is B; Y is S; Z is CR6 wherein one R6 is a C12 heteroaryl group and the remaining R6 are hydrogen and Q1 is a substituted C6 aromatic hydrocarbon ring.)
As per claim 21, Seda teaches:
An organic light emitting device comprising a first electrode, a second electrode facing the first electrode, an organic layer interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the organic layer comprises the polycyclic aromatic compound (Seda teaches the fabrication of exemplary OLEDS in [0391 – 0396] and describes that an anode is formed and then sequentially a HIL, HTL1, HTL2, EML, ETL, EIL and a cathode were formed. In Example 1, Compound 1 is used in the light emitting layer.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, and 3 – 14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As per claim 1, the closest prior art is considered to be Kim (US20230114182A1), cited previously. Kim teaches fused polycyclic boron-containing compounds with extended fused ring groups. However, Kim does not teach or suggest that the extended fused group contains a five-membered ring fused to a phenyl fused to a five or six member ring with a double bond on the far side of the ring as required by the Q1 group in claim 1 as amended.
Conclusion
All claims are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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
Prosecution Insights