Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/003,918

ORGANIC COMPOUND, ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 30, 2022
Examiner
DIAMOND, ALAN D
Art Unit
3991
Tech Center
3900
Assignee
Shaanxi Lighte Optoelectronics Material Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
137 granted / 192 resolved
+11.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
213
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
22.9%
-17.1% vs TC avg
§102
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§112
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 192 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . 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. Claim 14 is 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. Claim 14 is indefinite because compound Nos. 89-167, 169-172, 177-184, 186-196 and 201-204 lack positive antecedent basis in parent claim 1’s formula 1, which, as noted below, has a carbon atom at the annotation arrow: PNG media_image1.png 176 184 media_image1.png Greyscale . Instead of a carbon atom, compound Nos. 89-167, 169-172, 177-184, 186-196 and 201-204 have an oxygen atom or sulfur atom. In claim 14, compound Nos. 89 and 177 are identical. It is suggested that one of them be removed. 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 14 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 14 is in improper dependent form for failing to further limit claim 1, whose chemical formula 1, reproduced below, has a carbon atom at the annotation arrow: PNG media_image1.png 176 184 media_image1.png Greyscale . Instead of a carbon atom, compound Nos. 89-167, 169-172, 177-184, 186-196 and 201-204 have an oxygen atom or sulfur atom. 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 § 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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/262853 A1 to Park et al (hereinafter “Park”). Park, which is in Korean, is cited in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed 12/30/2022. A machine English translation of Park accompanies the instant Office action and is hereinafter referred to below. The first page of the translation starts with the Abstract page. The remaining pages are the second, third, etc. The Park translation does not provide compound structures. The compound structures in Park cited below are obtained from the copy of Park in said IDS. Park teaches compounds capable of lowering a driving voltage and improving luminous efficiency and lifetime of an organic electric device (see Abstract and the second and third pages of the translation). Park’s compounds have the following general formula: PNG media_image2.png 238 292 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein X is O or S, and the R groups and subscripts are defined on the ninth page of the translation (see also ¶ 87 in the copy of Park in the IDS). Park further teaches a more limited genus of the general formula: PNG media_image3.png 136 158 media_image3.png Greyscale in which -L1-Ar1 is: PNG media_image4.png 108 86 media_image4.png Greyscale , and wherein the Z1 to Z8 are either N or C(R1), and wherein R1 is preferably a C6 to C18 aryl group (see the eleventh page of the translation and ¶¶ 111 and 119-120 in the copy of Park in the IDS). An exemplary compound in Park is compound P-6, reproduced below from p. 16 in the copy of Park in the IDS, alongside instant compounds 92 and 180, which are similar to P-6: PNG media_image5.png 182 142 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 130 140 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 116 134 media_image7.png Greyscale . . Park’s compound P-6 differs from compounds 92 and 180 since said R1 groups are phenyl and phenylene-naphthyl in compound 92 and 180, whereas the R1 groups in P-6 are phenyl and naphthyl. Also, P-6 has a sulfur atom instead of an oxygen atom at said X position for compound 92. Other instant compounds similar to P-6 that differ in said R1 groups and/or use of oxygen instead of sulfur at the X position include the following: PNG media_image8.png 124 152 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 166 152 media_image9.png Greyscale PNG media_image10.png 128 124 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 122 162 media_image11.png Greyscale PNG media_image12.png 142 124 media_image12.png Greyscale and PNG media_image13.png 120 142 media_image13.png Greyscale . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have replaced the R1 groups in Park’s compound P-6 with those present in the above-noted instant compounds with the goal of preparing compounds within the scope of Park’s disclosure having preferred R1 groups that are C6 to C18 aryl, wherein the compound is capable of lowering a driving voltage and improving the luminous efficiency and lifetime of the organic electric device, as taught by Park. Likewise, the instant specification has a similar goal of improving the light-efficiency and service life of an electronic device using the instant compound (see ¶ 006). It further would have been obvious to have replaced the sulfur atom in compound P-6 with an oxygen atom because, as noted above, Park teaches that X is O or S. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-13, 15 and 16 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: CN 114085228 A teaches compounds such as the following compound reproduced below from p. 8: PNG media_image14.png 178 182 media_image14.png Greyscale . However, this compound has too many fused rings in the main fused ring system compared to the instant compound. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN D DIAMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-1338. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 5:30 am to 3:00 pm, and Fridays from 5:30 am to 9:30 am. 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, Patricia Engle can be reached at 571-272-6660. 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. Signed: /ALAN D DIAMOND/Primary Examiner Art Unit 3991
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 30, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent RE50811
Rapid Imaging Systems and Methods for Facilitating Rapid Radiation Therapies
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent RE50805
SINGLE-LAYER ORAL DOSE OF NEURO-ATTENUATING KETAMINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent RE50799
JAK1 SELECTIVE INHIBITORS AND USES THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent RE50790
INK COMPOSITION, INK JET RECORDING METHOD, METHOD FOR PRODUCING PLANOGRAPHIC PRINTING PLATE AND PLANOGRAPHIC PRINTING PLATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent RE50776
INHIBITORS OF CYCLIN-DEPENDENT KINASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+7.6%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 192 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