DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Amendment filed 07/14/26.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The objection to Claims 6 and 7 as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the cancellation of the claims.
The objection to Claims 1-5, 8, and 11-15 as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the Applicant’s amendments.
The rejection of Claims 6 and 7 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 as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the cancellation of the claims.
The rejection of Claims 1-5, 8, and 11-15 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U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is herein withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s arguments.
The rejection of Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2021/0163427 A1) as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the cancellation of the claim.
The rejection of Claims 1-5, 8, and 11-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2021/0163427 A1) as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the Applicant’s amendments.
The rejection of Claims 6 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inayama et al. (US 2019/0214570 A1) as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the cancellation of the claims.
The rejection of Claims 1-5, 8, and 11-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inayama et al. (US 2019/0214570 A1) as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 04/29/26 is overcome by the Applicant’s amendments.
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 1-5, 8, and 11-15 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.
Claim 1, which the other claims are dependent upon, recite the presence of the “Re” group in several of the structures for the second chemical moiety which is now nowhere defined. The Office has defined the Re group as equivalent in scope to the Re group as defined in the previous claim sheet filed 04/05/23.
Correction is required.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 11-15 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.
Claim 1, which the other claims are dependent upon, and Claim 5 define the scope of R15 (pages 13 and 20, respectively) which is nowhere found in the recited structural formulae. Any recitation of “R15” should be deleted.
Correction is required.
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, which is dependent on Claim 13 (and thus Claim 1), recites “the composition” which lacks antecedent basis.
Correction is required.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments (pages 23-28) with respect to the deficiencies of the previously stated rejections in view of the newly amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as set forth above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1137. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6am-3pm.
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 A 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.
/JAY YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights