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. Priority 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. CN 2022/10841904.1 , filed on 07/18/2022 . Drawings The drawings are objected to because under CFR 1.84(u), if only one drawing is shown it must not be numbered and the abbreviation “FIG.” must not appear. Instead, it should be labeled “FIGURE”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In accordance to the Drawing s objection, all references to “Fig. 1” should be changed to “the FIGURE". Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim s 1–5, 7, 13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2021/0020845 A1, provided in Applicants’ IDS filed on 04/07/2023, hereafter Park) . Regarding Claim s 1 and 13 , Park teaches the organic light-emitting device of Example 3 comprising an anode, a cathode, and an electron transporting layer comprising Compound 2-7 [0340]. Compound 2-7 reads on Applicants’ formula I, formula II, and formula III (shown below), w herein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is an unsubstituted C6 arylene (phenylene), Hy 1 is represented by formula III, and Hy 2 is represented by formula II, Y is O, X 5 is N, X 1 –X 4 and X 6 –X 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein XCR 1 –XCR 4 and XCR 6 –XCR 7 are each hydrogen, while XCR 8 is a C 6 alkenyl which forms a ring with itself (phenyl), A 4 is N, A 1 –A 3 and A 5 –A 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein ACR 1 – ACR 3 , ACR 7 –ACR 8 are each hydrogen, while ACR 5 and ACR 6 are represented by a nitrogen substituted C 3 alkenyl which form a ring (pyridine). Overall Hy 1 is a phenanthroline, similar to Applicants’ Compound M525 of claim 12 . Regarding Claim 2 , Compound 2-7 does not have a substituent on the C 6 aryl (phenyl), the C 6 arylene (phenyl ene ), the C 6 alkenyl that forms a ring (phenyl), or the C 3 alkenyl that forms a ring (pyridine) . Therefore, Applicants’ limitation of limiting an optional substituent , which are not present in Compound 2-7 , is met. Regarding Claim 3 , Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each s phenyl in Compound 2-7. Regarding Claim 4 , L is a phenylene in Compound 2-7. Regarding Claim 5 , Compound 2-7 comprises S ubstructure 1 ( shown below ) . Regarding Claim 7 , Compound 2-7 comprises S ubstructure 2 ( shown below ) . Regarding Claim 15 , Park teaches the organic light-emitting device may be used in displays [0273] – [0274]. Claims 1, 3–6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoon et al. (WO 2019/212287 A1, the WO equivalent of CN 111886236 A provided in Applicants’ IDS filed on 04/07/2023, hereafter Yoon ) . A Google Translate English translation is provided within this office action through WIPO. An Espacenet translation is also provided, as it appears to be more accurate. The citations provided point to the WIPO translation as it has paragraph numbers, but those passages may easily be cross referenced with the Espacenet translation for a more accurate interpretation. Regarding Claims 1 , Yoon teaches Compound 1 [0196] which reads on Applicants’ formula I, formula II, and formula III (shown below), wherein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is a single bond, Hy 1 is represented by formula II, and Hy 2 is represented by formula II I , Y is O, X 6 is N, X 1 –X 5 and X 7 –X 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein XCR 1 –XCR 5 and XCR 7 –XCR 8 are each hydrogen, A 6 and A 8 are N, A 1 –A 5 and A 7 are represented by CR 1 wherein ACR 1 – ACR 4 are each hydrogen, while ACR 5 is represented by a C 6 alkenyl which form a ring substituted with a N- phenylindole to overall form a n N- phenylcarbazole . Regarding Claim 3 , Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each s phenyl in Compound 1. Regarding Claim 4 , L is a single bond in Compound 1. Regarding Claim 5 , Compound 1 comprises Substructure 3 (shown below). Regarding Claim 6 , Compound 1 comprises Substructure 4 (shown below). Regarding Claim 8 , Compound 1 reads on Applicants’ limitation since Hy 1 is connected to Hy 2 through a C atom wherein on both sides adjacent to the connecting C atom in Hy 2 is an N atom (shown below). Claims 1 –4, 6, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (WO 2019/240471 A1, hereafter Lee) An English translation is provided within this office action . Regarding Claim 1 and 13 , Lee teaches an organic light-emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an electron transport layer comprising a heterocyclic compound of Lee’s Chemical Formula 1 [141] – [142], exemplified by Compound E TL 1 [132] . Lee further teaches organic light-emitting device E xamples 1-1 to 1-8 wherein a heterocyclic compound of Chemical Formula 1 is used in the electron transport layer [225] – [237]. Compound E TL 1 reads on Applicants’ formula I, formula II, and formula III (shown below), wherein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is a single bond, Hy 1 is represented by formula III, A 8 is N, A 1 –A 7 are each CR 1 wherein R 1 is hydrogen, Hy 2 is represented by formula III, A 2 is N, A 1 , A 3 –A 8 are each CR 1 wherein R 1 is hydrogen Notably, Hy 1 and Hy 2 are both represented by formula III however they are different because N is present at a different position. Regarding Claim 2 , Compound ETL1 does not have a substituent on the C 6 aryl (phenyl). Therefore, Applicants’ limitation of limiting an optional substituent, which are not present in Compound ETL1, is met. Regarding Claim 3 , Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each a phenyl in Compound ETL1 . Regarding Claim 4 , L is a single bond in Compound ETL1 . Regarding Claim 6 , Compound ETL1 comprises Substructure 3 (shown below). 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. 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 . 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. Claims 14, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2021/0020845 A1) as applied to claims 1–5, 7, 13, 15 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0173331 A1, hereafter Kim) . Regarding Claim s 14 and 16 , Park teaches that a capping layer on an electrode of an organic light-emitting device may increase external luminescence efficiency according to the principle of constructive interference [0263]. Park further teaches the capping layer may comprise a heterocyclic compound [0265]. However, Park does not teach the use of a compound of Formula 1, like Compound 2-7, in the capping layer of an organic light-emitting device. Kim teaches compounds of Kim Formula 1 may be used in the electron transport layer and/ or the capping layer of an organic light-emitting diode [0008] – [0013]. Kim further teaches using a compound of Kim Formula 1 in the capping layer and the electron transport layer of an organic light-emitting diode leads to unexpectedly superior driving voltage, luminance efficiency, and lifespan [0444] . Specifically, Kim teaches Kim Formula 1 and Kim Formula 1-19, exemplified by Compound 1-3 [0129] (shown below). Compound 1-3 is represented by Kim Formula 1 wherein A 11 and A 12 are represented by Kim Formula 1-19. Notably, it is similar to Compound 2-7, taught by Park, aside from the triazine group being attached at a different position to the phenylene, and Compound 2-7 has a benzofuropyridine substituent on the phenanthroline. However, Kim teaches that E 11 of Kim Formula 1 may be a C 11 heterocyclic group ( benazofuropyridine ) substituted with a C 6 carbocyclic group (phenyl). Therefore, Compound 2-7 is encompassed Kim Formula 1 and organic light-emitting devices utilizing Compound 2-7 in the electron transport layer and the capping layer may receive the driving voltage, efficiency, and lifespan benefits, taught by Kim. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Compound 2-7 in the capping layer of the organic light-emitting device taught by Park , based on the teaching of Kim . The motivation for doing so would have been to produce an organic light-emitting device with the driving voltage, efficiency, and lifespan benefits taught by Kim . Per Claim 14 , the organic light-emitting device utilizing Compound 2-7 in both the electron transport layer and the capping layer, as described above, read s on Applicants’ limitation as Compound 2-7 reads on Applicants’ formula I, formula II, and formula III (shown below), wherein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is an unsubstituted C6 arylene (phenylene), Hy 1 is represented by formula III, and Hy 2 is represented by formula II, Y is O, X 5 is N, X 1 –X 4 and X 6 –X 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein XCR 1 –XCR 4 and XCR 6 –XCR 7 are each hydrogen, while XCR 8 is a C 6 alkenyl which forms a ring with itself (phenyl), A 4 is N, A 1 –A 3 and A 5 –A 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein ACR 1 – ACR 3 , ACR 7 –ACR 8 are each hydrogen, while ACR 5 and ACR 6 are represented by a nitrogen substituted C 3 alkenyl which form a ring (pyridine). Per Claim 16 , the organic light-emitting device utilizing Compound 2-7 in both the electron transport layer and the capping layer, as described above, reads on Applicants’ limitation since Park teaches the organic light-emitting device may be used in displays [0273] – [0274]. Claim 1 –5, 7–9, 12–13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2021/0020845 A1) . Regarding Claim 1 –5, 7–9, 12–13, 15 , Park teaches Example 3 comprising an anode, a cathode, and an electron transporting layer comprising Compound 2-7 [0340], as discussed above. Park further teaches organic light-emitting devices including a compound represented by Formula 1 may exhibit excellent efficiency and improved lifespan [0347]. However , Compound 2-7 does not have Hy 1 and Hy 2 connected wherein an N atom is adjacent to the connecting C atom in both Hy 1 and Hy 2 as recited in claim 9 . Park teaches Compound 2-7 is represented by Formula 1 [0043] (shown below), w herein: Y 1 –Y 3 are each N, L is a C 6 carbocyclic group (phenyl), A is a benzene, Park teaches when A is benzene, a moiety including Y 1 –Y 3 may be linked to the moiety including A [0052]. For Compound 2-7, the moiety is a benzofuropyridine substituted with a C 6 carbocyclic group (phenyl). Park teaches L can be linked to carbon 2 or carbon 3 of Formula 1 [0052]. Additionally, Park does not specify where the nitrogen in the benzofuropyridine is position ed or where the benzofuropyridine is linked to the moiety including A. An ordinary artisan would know that bonding positions may be altered and therefore could make a compound like Modified Compound 2-7 (shown below). Given the general formula and teachings of Park , 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 Modified Compound 2-7 wherein the phenylene is linked on carbon 2 , the beznofuropyridine is linked in a different position , and the N in the benzofuropyridine is in a different position . One of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would have been motivated to produce additional compounds represented by Formula 1 /the positional isomers of the compound represented by Compound 2-7 in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp and would expect the isomeric compounds to be useful as an electron transport material in the electron transport layer of the organic light-emitting device of Park and possess the excellent efficiency and improved lifespan benefits taught by Park . 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. Per Claim s 1 and 13 , the light emitting device, as described above, comprising t he modified version of Compound 2-7 (hereafter Modified Compound 2-7) reads on Applicants’ Formula I, Formula II, and Formula III (shown below), wherein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is an unsubstituted C6 arylene (phenylene), Hy 1 is represented by formula III, and Hy 2 is represented by formula II, Y is O, X 2 is N, X 1 , X 3 –X 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein XCR 1 , XCR 3 – XCR 8 are each hydrogen, A 4 is N, A 1 –A 3 and A 5 –A 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein ACR 1 – ACR 3 , ACR 7 –ACR 8 are each hydrogen, while ACR 5 and ACR 6 are represented by a nitrogen substituted C 3 alkenyl which form a ring (pyridine). Per Claim 2 , Modified Compound 2-7 does not have a substituent on the C 6 aryl (phenyl), or the C 6 arylene (phenyl ene ) . Therefore, Applicants’ limitation of limiting an optional substituent, which are not present in Modified Compound 2-7, is met. Per Claim 3 , Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each s phenyl in Modified Compound 2-7. Per Claim 4 , L is a phenylene in Modified Compound 2-7. Per Claim 5 , Modified Compound 2-7 comprises Substructure 5 (shown below). Per Claim 7 , Modified Compound 2-7 comprises Substructure 2 (shown below). Per Claims 8 and 9 , Modified Compound 2-7 reads on Applicants’ limitation since Hy 1 is connected to Hy 2 through a C atom wherein one side adjacent to the connecting C atom in Hy 1 is an N atom . Additionally, one side adjacent to the connected C atom in Hy 2 is an N atom (shown below). Per Claim 12 , Modified Compound 2-7 is identical to Applicants ’ Compound M525. Per Claim 15 , Park teaches the organic light-emitting device may be used in displays [0273] – [0274]. Claim s 1–6, 10– 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (WO 2019/212287 A1) . Regarding Claims 1–6, 11 , Yoon teaches Compound 1 which reads on Applicants’ independent claim 1, as described above. However, Compound 1 fails to read on Applicants’ dependent claim 1 1 wherein the attachment to Formula III is specified. Yoon further teaches that Compound 1 is represented by Yoon’s Chemical Formula 1 (shown below) , wherein: X is O, A1 is CH, A2 is N, L is a single bond, R1 is represented by Group A Fragment 1 ( quinazolinyl group) , wherein a31 is 1, R2 and R3 are each an unsubstituted aryl group (phenyl), R31 is a heteroaryl group (carbazole) substituted with an aryl group (phenyl), Although Group A Fragment 1 has a specified bonding position, Yoon teaches more broadly that R 1 may be represented by an unsubstituted quinazolinyl group [99]. An ordinary artisan would know that bonding positions may be altered and therefore could make a compound like Modified Compound 1 (shown below). Additionally, a31 may be 0 in which case R31 is not present. Given the general Chemical Formula 1 and teachings of Yoon , 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 Compound 1 wherein the quinazolinyl group is bonded at a different position . One of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would have been motivated to produce additional positional isomers of the compound represented by Compound 1 in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp and would expect the isomeric compounds to be useful as a host material in the light-emitting layer of the organic light-emitting device of Yoon and possess the improved driving voltage and efficiency taught by Yoon [596] . 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. Per Claim 1 , Modified Compound 1 reads on Applicants’ formula I, formula II, and formula III (shown below), wherein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is a single bond, Hy 1 is represented by formula II, and Hy 2 is represented by formula III, Y is O, X 6 is N, X 1 –X 5 and X 7 –X 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein each XCR 1 –XCR 5 and XCR 7 –XCR 8 are each hydrogen, A 1 and A 3 are N, A 2 , A 4 –A 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein each R 1 is hydrogen. Per Claim 2 , Modified Compound 1 does not have a substituent on the C 6 aryl (phenyl). Therefore, Applicants’ limitation of limiting an optional substituent, which are not present in Modified Compound 1 , is met. Per Claim 3 , Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each s phenyl in Modified Compound 1. Per Claim 4 , L is a single bond in Modified Compound 1. Per Claim 5 , Modified Compound 1 comprises Substructure 3 (shown below). Per Claim 6 , Modified Compound 1 comprises Substructure 4 (shown below). Per Claim 11 , Modified Compound 1 reads on Applicants’ limitation as Hy 1 and Hy 2 are connected with # as shown below, wherein A 10 is N, while A 9 , A 11 –A 14 are each CR 2 where R 2 is hydrogen. Additionally, Hy 1 is represented by Substructure 3. Regarding Claim 1 0 , Modified Compound 1 reads on Applicants’ independent claim 1, as described above. However, Modified Compound 1 fails to read on Applicants’ dependent claim 10 wherein the attachment to Formula III is specified. In Modified Compound 1, R31 is not present because a31 is 0. However , Yoon teaches in an exemplary embodiment that R31 may be a heteroaryl group which contains at least one N [119], such as a triazine substituted with two phenyls ( diphenyltriazine ). Yoon teaches a finite list of heteroaryl groups including triazinyl groups [58]. This modification of using triazine as R31 is hereafter called Modified Compound 2 (shown below). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R31 of Modified Compound 1 to be diphenyltriazine , because it would have been choosing between a list of heterocycles containing at least one N , which would have been a choice from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions of a compound useful as the host material in the light-emitting layer of the organic light-emitting device of Yoon and possessing the improved driving voltage and efficiency taught by Yoon [596] . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to produce additional compounds represented by/devices comprising compounds of Chemical Formula 1 having the benefits taught by Yoon in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.I.(E). Per Claims 1 , Modified Compound 2 reads on Applicants’ formula I, formula II, and formula III (shown below), wherein: Ar 1 and Ar 2 are each an unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L is a single bond, Hy 1 is represented by formula II I , and Hy 2 is represented by formula II, Y is O, X 6 is N, X 1 –X 5 and X 7 –X 8 are represented by CR 1 wherein each XCR 1 –XCR 5 and XCR 7 –XCR 8 are each hydrogen, A 1 and A 3 are N, A 4 –A 8 are represented by CR 4 –CR 8 wherein each is hydrogen. A 2 is represented by ACR 2 which is a nitrogen substituted C 3 alkenyl which form a ring ( triazine) substituted with two phenyls. Per Claim 1 0 , Modified Compound 2 reads on Applicants’ limitation as Hy 1 and Hy 2 are connected with # , and Hy 1 and L are connected with ## as shown below, wherein A 10 is N, A 9 is connected to L which is a single bond, while A 11 –A 14 are each CR 2 where R 2 is hydrogen. Additionally, Hy 2 is represented by Substructure 3. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: L v et al. (CN 114276360 A1, provided in Applicants’ IDS filed on 04/07/2023 , hereafter L v ) recites structures such as Compound 58 (shown below) which would read on Applicants’ independent claim 1 if L 1 or L 2 are modified to be aza substituted. L v allows L to be a heteroarene. Park et al. (US 2017/0200903 A1, hereafter Park2) recites structural isomers of compounds that would read on Applicants’ independent claim 1, such as Compound 1-11 (shown below). Park et al. (US 2021/0320259 A1, hereafter Park3) recites structural isomers of compounds that would read on Applicants’ independent claim 1, such as Compound 4 (shown below). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JAMES RICHARD FORTWENGLER whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5433 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday, 8 am - 5 pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Marla McConnell can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (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. /J.R.F./ Examiner, Art Unit 1789 /MARLA D MCCONNELL/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789