CTNF 18/016,185 CTNF 94935 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 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. Priority 02-27 AIA Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2020-0094575 , filed on 07/29/2020 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 01/13/2023, 11/19/2023, 01/18/2024, 05/02/2024, 07/19/2024, and 01/03/2025 were filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 01/13/2023. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Response to Amendment In the preliminary amendment filed 01/13/2023, the claims and specification were amended. These amendments are hereby entered. Claims 9, 10, 14, and 19 have been amended. Claims 1-21 are pending in the application. Drawings 06-21 AIA New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because where only a single view is used in an application to illustrate the claimed invention, it must not be numbered and the abbreviation "FIG." must not appear (See MPEP 1.84(u)) . Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance. Please correct all references to Figure 1 in the specification as well. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Throughout the specification, Chemical Formulae A and B comprise several R substituents followed by a number as a subscript, however, these formulae are subsequently defined by R substituents followed by a number which is not a subscript. Throughout the specification, in Chemical Formulae D1 and D2, the letter and numbers in “r12” are transposed. In Chemical Formula D2 (pages 36-37), Q 12 is represented by the following structure: PNG media_image1.png 298 448 media_image1.png Greyscale However, variable Z2 is not defined anywhere in the instant disclosure. Additionally, the Chemical Formula D2 set forth on pages 36-37, which comprises variable Z2, is different from the Chemical Formula D2 on page 103, which comprises two z1 variables. The letters, numbers, and/or bonds in the chemical structures given on pages 138-139 are illegible. Please correct these structures so all letters, numbers, and/or bonds are clearly visible. See the example below. PNG media_image2.png 346 374 media_image2.png Greyscale Please note that this example is non-limiting and there may be other structures that require correction. Please check all formulae to make sure they are clear. Applicant may wish to make these structures clearer by increasing font size, making the font bold, and/or making the lines thicker . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 7, 13, 16, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: With respect to claim 7, a comma is missing after the word “substituent” on line 3. With respect to claim 13, in Chemical Formulae D1 and D2, the letter and numbers in variable r12 are transposed. Claim 16 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should not reference two sets of claims with different features (claim 14 is a diode whereas claims 1 to 9 are a compound). See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 16 has not been further treated on the merits. With respect to claim 19, the claim contains the limitation that the first and second light emitting layer independently comprise as a dopant at least one selected from compounds represented by Chemical Formulas D1 to D10. In the art of organic chemistry, when more than one formula is present, the appropriate way to reference them is with the word “formulae” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-21 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. With respect to independent claim 1, the claim contains the following limitation: PNG media_image3.png 102 944 media_image3.png Greyscale The syntax of this claim is confusing and leads to question of which 5-membered ring Applicant is referring to. In continuing examination, Examiner is interpreting this limitation as, “wherein two adjacent carbon atoms of the aromatic ring A 1 and two adjacent carbon atoms of the aromatic ring A 2 form the [[a]] 5-membered fused ring comprising [[together with]] the carbon atom having substituents R 1 and R 2 linked thereto;”. Also with respect to independent claim 1, Chemical Formulae A and B comprise several R substituents with a subscript, however, the claim subsequently defines several R substituents which do not have a subscript. This introduces uncertainty because it is unclear what the definitions of R 1 through R 8 and R 11 through R 15 are, and what variables R1 to R8 and R11 to R15 are referencing. In continuing examination, this is being interpreted as a typographical error, wherein R1 through R8 and R11 through R15 refer to R 1 through R 8 and R 11 through R 15 , respectively. With respect to claim 7, the scope of the definitions of L 1 to L 4 and R 11 to R 15 is unclear. The claim refers to R 11 to R 15 as a linking group, despite these substituents not acting as a linking group in parent claim 1. Additionally, the claim presents definitions for L 1 to L 4 which include monodentate substituents, such as a hydrogen atom, which, by definition, cannot be a linking group. In continuing examination, only the definitions for L 1 to L 4 , as set forth in parent claim 1, will be considered, and only the definitions for R 11 to R 15 , as set forth in parent claim 1, will be considered. Also with respect to claim 7, the claim contains the limitation that L 1 to L 4 and R 11 to R 15 may be “a substituent”. This represents a scope which does not further limit the scope of the parent claim because the scope of “substituent” is larger than the scope of L 1 to L 4 and R 11 to R 15 as given in parent claim 1. In continuing examination, only the definitions for L 1 to L 4 , as set forth in parent claim 1, will be considered, and only the definitions for R 11 to R 15 , as set forth in parent claim 1, will be considered. With respect to claim 13, the claim contains the following limitation: PNG media_image4.png 118 962 media_image4.png Greyscale The syntax of this claim is confusing and leads to question of which 5-membered ring Applicant is referring to. In continuing examination, Examiner is interpreting this limitation as, “wherein two adjacent carbon atoms of the aromatic ring A3 1 and two adjacent carbon atoms of the aromatic ring A 32 form the [[a]] 5-membered fused ring comprising [[together with]] the carbon atom to which substituents R 51 and R 52 are bonded;”. Also with respect to claim 13, character Z2 is not defined anywhere in the instant disclosure. In continuing examination, Z2 will be interpreted as having the same definition of z1, as set forth on page 103 of the instant specification. With respect to claim 17, Chemical Formula E comprises linking group L 1 , however, this character is never defined. Similarly, the claim contains a definition for character L1, however, no L1 is present in Chemical Formula E. This introduces uncertainty because it is unclear what the definition of L 1 is, and what variables L1 is referencing. In continuing examination, this is being interpreted as a typographical error, wherein L1 refers to L 1 . Also with respect to claim 17, the claim is dependent from claim 16 which is not being treated further on the merits. In continuing examination, claim 17 will be interpreted as dependent from claim 14. With respect to claim 18, Chemical Formulae E-1 and E-2 comprise variable “K”, however, this character is never defined. Similarly, the claim contains a definition for variable “k”, however, no “k” is present in Chemical Formulae E-1 or E-2. This introduces uncertainty because it is unclear what the definition of “K” is, and what variable “k” is referencing. In continuing examination, this is being interpreted as a typographical error, wherein K refers to k. With respect to claim 19, the claim contains Chemical Formulae D1 to D10, however, none of the characters or variables in these formulae are defined in the instant claim nor any preceding claim. In continuing examination, the definitions for Chemical Formulae D1 to D10 will be taken from pages 36 through 43 of the instant specification. Claims 2-6, 8-12, 14-16, 20-21 are rejected by virtue of dependency. 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 s 7 and 19 are 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. With respect to claim 7, the claim contains the limitation that L 1 to L 4 and R 11 to R 15 may be “a substituent”. This represents a scope which does not further limit the scope of the parent claim because the scope of “substituent” is larger than the scope of L 1 to L 4 and R 11 to R 15 as set forth in parent claim 1. With respect to claim 19, the claim contains Chemical Formulae D1 to D10, however, none of the characters or variables are defined in the instant claim nor any preceding claim. This fails to limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends because it does not actually introduce any information which could be used to narrow the limitations of the dopants in the first and second light-emitting layer which was already set forth in parent claim 14 . 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 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-8, 10-11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (WO 2018/095385 A1, using US 2021/0114954 A1 as an official translation and for references) . With respect to claim 1, Yang discloses a compound of instant [Chemical Formula A] (general formula I, paragraph 0010). The compound is pictured below (page 29). PNG media_image5.png 234 468 media_image5.png Greyscale This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula A when A 1 , A 2 , and E are all an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), F is not present, two adjacent carbon atoms of A 2 and two adjacent carbon atoms of A 1 are fused to the 5-membered ring comprising substituents R 1 and R 2 , y is 1, s1 is 1, L 1 is a single bond, and Ar 1 is represented by Structural Formula C, M is an oxygen atom, R 1 and R 2 are a C 1 alkyl (methyl), R 3 through R 8 are not present, R 11 and R 12 are hydrogen atoms, R 13 through R 15 are not present, x and z are 0, and s2, L 2 , Ar 2 , s3, L 3 , and Ar 3 are not present. In Structural Formula C, R 21 is a single bond linking to L 1 , R 26 is an alkyl-substituted (n,n’-dimethyl) heteroaryl group of 19 carbon atoms, and all remaining R characters are hydrogen atoms. With respect to claim 2, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, and A 1 , A 2 , and E are all an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), and F is not present, as discussed above. With respect to claim 3, Yang teaches the compound of claim 2, and the aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms is represented by instant Structural Formula 10 (benzene), as discussed above. With respect to claim 4, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, and L 1 is a single bond, and L 2 through L 4 are not present, as discussed above. With respect to claim 5, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, and y is 1, and x and z are 0, as discussed above. With respect to claim 6, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, and R 1 and R 2 are a C 1 alkyl (methyl) group, as discussed above. With respect to claim 7, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, and R 21 is a single bond linking to L 1 and R 11 and R 12 are hydrogen atoms, and R 13 through R 15 are not present, as discussed above. With respect to claim 8, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, as discussed above. Yang also teaches the compound below (page 30). PNG media_image6.png 212 496 media_image6.png Greyscale This compound meets the requirements of parent claim 1 when M is CR 4 R 5 , R 4 and R 5 are C 1 alkyl groups. This compound also meets the requirements of the instant claim when R 23 and R 28 are an alkyl of 3 carbon atoms (isopropyl). With respect to claim 10, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1 as discussed above. Yang also teaches Compound 7, which is pictured below (pages 30 and 51). PNG media_image6.png 212 496 media_image6.png Greyscale Yang uses this compound in the preparation of an organic light emitting diode (OLED, paragraph 0205), comprising a first electrode (anode, ITO), a second electrode (cathode, Al), and an organic layer between the electrodes which comprises compound 7 (paragraph 0209). With respect to claim 11, Yang teaches the diode of claim 10, and the organic layer comprises a hole injection layer (HIL), a hole transport layer (HTL), a light emitting layer comprising the compound, and an electron transport layer (ETL) (paragraph 0210). With respect to claim 20, Yang teaches the diode of claim 11, and Yang also teaches that hole injection layer (HIL) is prepared using vapor deposition process (thermal evaporation, paragraph 0212) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) 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. 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9, 12, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (WO 2018/095385 A1, using US 2021/0114954 A1 as an official translation and for references) . With respect to claim 9, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, as discussed above. Given the general formula and teachings of Yang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the positional isomer of the compound pictured and discussed above in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp and would expect the isomeric compounds to be useful as a dopant in the organic layer of the electroluminescent device of Yang and possess the properties taught by Yang. A prima facie case of obviousness exists when chemical compounds have very close structural similarity and similar utilities. See MPEP 2144.09 I. When compounds which are position isomers or homologs are of sufficiently close structural similarity, there is an expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. See MPEP 2144.09 II. Such a positional isomer is instant compound H 167. With respect to claim 12, Yang teaches the diode of claim 11, as discussed above. Yang also teaches that the inventive compounds (the fused ring compound) may be used as a host with a fluorescent emitter (paragraph 0095). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound of Yang as a host material in a light emitting layer, as taught by Yang. With respect to claim 21, Yang teaches the diode of claim 10, as discussed above. Yang also teaches that organic light-emitting didoes have great potential in optoelectronic devices such as flat panel displays (paragraph 0003). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the diode of claim 10 in a flat panel device, as taught by Yang . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (WO 2018/095385 A1, using US 2021/0114954 A1 as an official translation and for references) as applied above, and further in view of Cha et al. (KR 2019/0006930 A, using US 2020/0127209 A1 as an official translation and for references, herein after referred to as Cha-KR) . With respect to claim 13, Yang teaches the diode of claim 12, as discussed above. However, Yang does not teach nor fairly suggest that the dopant compound is represented by one of instant Chemical Formulae D1 to D10. In analogous art, Cha-KR teaches an organic light emitting diode comprising an amine compound of Chemical Formula D1 in a light emitting layer (paragraphs 0061-0062), wherein using the compound in a light emitting layer guarantees improved efficiency, and the compound may be compound 401 (paragraph 0084), which is pictured below. PNG media_image7.png 368 478 media_image7.png Greyscale This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula D1 when A 31 and A 32 , and E 1 are an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), F 1 is not present, x1 and y1 are 1, and z1 is 0 so that s13, L 29 , r13, L -28 , p13, L 27 , Ar 25, and Ar 26 are not present, s11, s12, r11, r12, p11, and p12 are all 1 and L 21 through L 26 are a single bond, W is an oxygen atom, W’ is not present, R 51 and R 52 are an aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl) and together form a spirobifluorene structure, R 53 through R 59 are not present, and Ar 21 through Ar 24 are independently an alkyl-substituted or unsubstituted aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Compound 401 of Cha-KR as a dopant in the light emitting layer of Yang in order to a light emitting layer with guaranteed improved efficiency, as taught by Cha-KR . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (WO 2018/095385 A1, using US 2021/0114954 A1 as an official translation and for references) as applied above, and further in view of Hatwar et al. (US 2010/0288362 A1) . With respect to claims 14 and 15, Yang teaches the compound of claim 1, as discussed above. However, Yang does not teach an organic light-emitting diode comprising a plurality of light-emitting layers, each with a host and dopant, wherein the diode also comprises a hole transport layer between the first electrode and first light-emitting layer, and an electron transport layer between the second light-emitting layer and the second electrode. In analogous art, Hatwar teaches a tandem organic electronic device comprising at least two organic phototransducing units which are separated by an intermediate connecting region (abstract) wherein each light emitting layer comprises at least one host and one dopant (paragraph 0092). Hatwar teaches the structure of the tandem OLED in Figure 3, which is pictured below, and which has been annotated using the definitions in paragraph [0100] to facilitate discussion. PNG media_image8.png 686 772 media_image8.png Greyscale Hatwar teaches that embodiments of the tandem light-emitting device of the invention can provide organic EL devices that have good luminance efficiency, good operational stability, and reduced drive voltages (paragraph 0131). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound of Yang as a host material in light-emitting layer of a tandem device with the claimed device structure in order to obtain an organic EL device which has good luminance efficiency, good operational stability, and reduced drive voltages, as taught by Hatwar. Such a device meets the requirements of the instant claim as it comprises two or more stacks, each comprising a hole transport layer, an emitting layer with a host and dopant, and an electron transport layer, and which are separated by a charge generation layer . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 17 through 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (WO 2018/095385 A1, using US 2021/0114954 A1 as an official translation and for references) and Hatwar et al. (US 2010/0288362 A1) as applied above, and further in view of Cha et al. (US 2019/0067588 A1, herein after referred to as Cha-US) . With respect to claims 17 and 18, Yang and Hatwar teach the diode of claim 14, as discussed above. However, neither Yang nor Hatwar teach that the second light-emitting layer comprises an anthracene-derivative host. In analogous art, Cha-US teaches an amine compound for use in an organic light emitting diode (abstract) which comprises a host-dopant system in the light emitting layer (paragraph 0004). Cha-US teaches that when a single material is employed as the luminescent material, intermolecular action cause the maximum luminescence wavelength to shift toward a longer wavelength, resulting in a reduction of color purity and light emitting efficiency, however, a host-dopant system works to increase color purty and light emitting efficiency through energy transfer (paragraph 0004). Cha-US gives an example of a suitable host material through the anthracene compound Chemical Formula 81 (page 16), which is pictured below. PNG media_image9.png 260 504 media_image9.png Greyscale Chemical Formula 81 meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formulae E and E-1 when R 41 to R 48 and R 49 to R 55 are hydrogen atoms, Ar 5 is an aryl of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), the linking group L is a arylene of 10 carbon atoms (naphthylene), and n/k is 1. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the anthracene host material of Cha-US as a host material in the second light emitting layer of the diode of Yang and Hatwar in order to increase color purty and light emitting efficiency through energy transfer, as taught by Cha-US. With respect to claim 19, Yang, Hatwar, and Cha-US teach the diode of claim 17, and Cha-US also teaches a dopant for use in the light-emitting layer of an organic light emitting diode (paragraphs 0009 and 0072) which exhibits high luminescence efficiency (paragraph 0009). This dopant may be represented by Chemical Formula 15 (page 8), which is pictured below. PNG media_image10.png 402 520 media_image10.png Greyscale This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula D2 when A 31 and A 32 are an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), E 1 and F 1 are an alkyl-substituted (t-butyl) aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), x1 and y1 are 1, and both of z1 are 0 so that s13, s14, L 29 , L 32 , r13, r14, L -28 , L 31 , p13, p14, L 27 , L 30 , Ar 25 , Ar 27 , Ar 28 and Ar 26 are not present, s11, s12, r11, r12, p11, and p12 are all 1 and L 21 through L 26 are a single bond, W and W’ are an oxygen atom, R 51 and R 52 are aryl group of 6 carbon atoms, R 53 through R 59 are not present, and Ar 21 through Ar 24 are an alkyl-substituted aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the dopant of Cha-US in the dopant in the light emitting layers of Yang, Hatwar, and Cha-US in order to obtain an organic light emitting diode which exhibits high luminescence efficiency, as taught by Cha-US . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yamada et al. (US 2007/0111029 A1) – Teaches relevant compounds. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M.. 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. /RACHEL SIMBANA/Examiner, Art Unit 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/016,185 Page 2 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/016,185 Page 3 Art Unit: 1786