CTNF 18/303,707 CTNF 84688 DETAILED ACTION 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. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the phrase “one of Z 1 , Z 2 , and Z 3 is N”. Applicants are advised to amend this phrase to recite “one of Z 1 , Z 2 , or Z 3 is N” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the following limitations: “ where Formula I comprises PNG media_image1.png 222 156 media_image1.png Greyscale and R 1 is tert-butyl, phenyl or d5-phenyl then the following conditions are true: 1) If R 2 is dibenzofuran, dibenzothiophene, or N-bound carbazole, then R 2 is fully deuterated; 2) If R 1 and R E are joined to form a dibenzofuran, dibenzothiophene, or a carbazole ring, then R 2 is not phenyl, d5-phenyl, 3,5-ditert-butylphenyl, or carbazole; 3) when R 1 is joined with R A to form the following structure PNG media_image2.png 232 210 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein each of X 12 – X 29 are independently C or N, then R 3 and R 4 are different ”. In order to avoid potential confusion that the compound must necessarily meet all three provisions, Applicants are advised to amend the phrase “then one of the following conditions is true”. Furthermore, Applicants are advised to amend “If” to recite “if” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 15 recites the phrase “R1 and/or R2”. Applicants are advised to amend this phrase to recite “R 1 and/or R 2 ” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 recites the phrase “one of Z 1 , Z 2 , and Z 3 is N”. Applicants are advised to amend this phrase to recite ““one of Z 1 , Z 2 , or Z 3 is N” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 recites the following limitations: “ where Formula I comprises PNG media_image1.png 222 156 media_image1.png Greyscale and R 1 is tert-butyl, phenyl or d5-phenyl then the following conditions are true: 1) If R 2 is dibenzofuran, dibenzothiophene, or N-bound carbazole, then R 2 is fully deuterated; 2) If R 1 and R E are joined to form a dibenzofuran, dibenzothiophene, or a carbazole ring, then R 2 is not phenyl, d5-phenyl, 3,5-ditert-butylphenyl, or carbazole; 3) when R 1 is joined with R A to form the following structure PNG media_image2.png 232 210 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein each of X 12 – X 29 are independently C or N, then R 3 and R 4 are different ”. In order to avoid potential confusion that the compound must necessarily meet all three provisions Applicants are advised to amend the phrase “then one of the following conditions is true”. Furthermore, Applicants are advised to amend “If” to recite “if” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 19 recites illegible host compounds, see Page 240 of claims. Applicants are advised to amend the claim providing legible versions of these compounds . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 20 recites the phrase “one of Z 1 , Z 2 , and Z 3 is N”. Applicants are advised to amend this phrase to recite ““one of Z 1 , Z 2 , or Z 3 is N” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 20 recites the following limitations: “ where Formula I comprises PNG media_image1.png 222 156 media_image1.png Greyscale and R 1 is tert-butyl, phenyl or d5-phenyl then the following conditions are true: 1) If R 2 is dibenzofuran, dibenzothiophene, or N-bound carbazole, then R 2 is fully deuterated; 2) If R 1 and R E are joined to form a dibenzofuran, dibenzothiophene, or a carbazole ring, then R 2 is not phenyl, d5-phenyl, 3,5-ditert-butylphenyl, or carbazole; 3) when R 1 is joined with R A to form the following structure PNG media_image2.png 232 210 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein each of X 12 – X 29 are independently C or N, then R 3 and R 4 are different ”. In order to avoid potential confusion that the compound must necessarily meet all three provisions Applicants are advised to amend the phrase “then one of the following conditions is true”. Furthermore, Applicants are advised to amend “If” to recite “if” . 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 AIA Claim s 6-7 and 16 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 6 recites structures such as: PNG media_image3.png 566 692 media_image3.png Greyscale , which render the scope of the claim indefinite for the following reasons. Claim 6, depends from claim 1, and claim 1 requires that in Formula I: PNG media_image4.png 344 330 media_image4.png Greyscale , ring C is a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring, and this ring is bonded to rings B and C, and M. However, in the above compounds in claim 8, while ring C is a 5-membered ring bonded to ring D, ring C is not bonded to M and ring B as required by Formula I in claim 1. Accordingly, it is unclear how one obtains the structures recited in claim 6 and still meets the requirements of Formula I in claim 1 that ring C is a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring and this ring is bonded to M and rings B and C. Claim 7 recites structures such as: PNG media_image5.png 375 790 media_image5.png Greyscale which render the scope of the claim indefinite for the following reasons. Claim 7, depends from claim 1, and claim 1 requires that in Formula I: PNG media_image4.png 344 330 media_image4.png Greyscale , ring C is a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring, and this ring is bonded to rings B and C, and M. However, in the above compounds in claim 8, while ring C is a 5-membered ring bonded to ring D, ring C is not bonded to M and ring B as required by Formula I in claim 1. Accordingly, it is unclear how one obtains the structures recited in claim 7 and still meets the requirements of Formula I in claim 1 that ring C is a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring and this ring is bonded to M and rings B and C. Claim 16 recites structures such as: PNG media_image6.png 502 606 media_image6.png Greyscale , which render the scope of the claim indefinite for the following reasons. Claim 6, depends from claim 1, and claim 1 requires that in Formula I: PNG media_image4.png 344 330 media_image4.png Greyscale , ring C is a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring, and this ring is bonded to rings B and C, and M. However, in the above compounds in claim 8, while ring C is a 5-membered ring bonded to ring D, ring C is not bonded to M and ring B as required by Formula I in claim 1. Accordingly, it is unclear how one obtains the structures recited in claim 16 and still meets the requirements of Formula I in claim 1 that ring C is a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring and this ring is bonded to M and rings B and C. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-6, 8-15, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al (US 2022/0106345) . Regarding claim 1, Bae et al discloses the following compound (Page 63 – Compound 85): PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale . This compound corresponds to the compound represented by formula I: PNG media_image8.png 336 318 media_image8.png Greyscale , where: M is Pt; ring B is a 6-membered carbocyclic ring; ring D is a 6-membered heterocyclic ring; Z 1 is C; Z 3 is N; X 1 to X 5 , X 8 to X 16 are C; L 1 is O; L 2 is a direct bond; R 1 is isopropyl; R 2 is H; R A represents two (2) C2 alkenyls that join to form a ring; R B and R C are hydrogen; R D is a combination of phenyl, i.e. aryl, and alkyl. In the compound disclosed by the reference ring C is not a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring as required by the present claims. However, the compound disclosed by the reference is but one embodiment and attention is directed to Formula 1-1 ([0014]): PNG media_image9.png 272 368 media_image9.png Greyscale , where ring A 20 can be a C 5-30 carbocyclic ring ([0019]). This ring is exemplified in a benzene ring in Compounds 299 and 300 (Page 98): PNG media_image10.png 208 228 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 240 250 media_image11.png Greyscale . Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where ring C in Formula I of the claims is a 6-carbocyclic ring where X 6 , X 7 and Z 2 are C. Although the compound comprises: PNG media_image1.png 222 156 media_image1.png Greyscale , R 1 is an isopropyl, and not tert-butyl, phenyl or d5-phenyl, and therefore, the compound is not required to meet provisions (1) to (3) recited in the present claims. Finally, it is noted that R 1 is isopropyl and R 2 is hydrogen, and therefore R 1 and R 2 are different as required by the present claims. While the reference fails to exemplify the presently claimed compound nor can the claimed compound be "clearly envisaged" from the reference as required to meet the standard of anticipation, nevertheless, in light of the overlap between the claimed compound and the compound disclosed by the reference, absent a showing of criticality for the presently claimed compound, it is urged that it would have been within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art, to use the compound which is both disclosed by the reference and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention. Regarding claim 2, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, two (2) substituents R A are alkenyl groups that join to form a ring. R 1 is isopropyl; R 2 is H; R A represents two (2) C 2 alkenyls that join to form a ring; R B and R C are hydrogen; and R D is a combination of phenyl, i.e. aryl, and alkyl. Regrading claim 3, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. From the discussion above, the compound disclosed by the reference does not correspond to Formula IA of the claims: PNG media_image12.png 334 298 media_image12.png Greyscale , i.e. the compound possesses a benzimidazole group and not an imidazole group as required by the claim. However, the reference discloses the following general formula for the compound ([0081] - Formula I-1A): PNG media_image13.png 340 370 media_image13.png Greyscale , A 10 can be ([0064] and Page 4 – A10-1): PNG media_image14.png 130 150 media_image14.png Greyscale . Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses the formula recited in the present claim. Regarding claim 4, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, L 1 is O. Regrading claim 5, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. In the compound disclosed by the reference: PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale , L 2 is a direct bond and not BR, NR, PR or CR as required by the present claim. However, the reference discloses the following general formula for the compound ([0081] – Formula I-1A): PNG media_image13.png 340 370 media_image13.png Greyscale , where T 2 can be B(R 3 ), where R 3 is hydrogen ([0021] and [0029]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where L 2 in Formula I is BR, where R is hydrogen. Regrading claim 6, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, the reference discloses the following compound: PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale , which corresponds to the recited formula: PNG media_image15.png 332 392 media_image15.png Greyscale . Regrading claim 8, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. From the discussion above, X 1 to X 11 are C. Regrading claim 9, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, X 1 to X 16 are C, and therefore, one of X 1 to X 11 is not N as required by the present claims. However, the reference discloses the following general formula for the compound ([0081] - Formula I-1A): PNG media_image13.png 340 370 media_image13.png Greyscale , where ring A 10 can be ([0064] and Page 5 – A10-19) PNG media_image16.png 112 174 media_image16.png Greyscale , i.e. X 11 in recited Formula I can be N. Regrading claim 10, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. From the discussion above, X 4’ to X 7’ are C. Regrading claim 11, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. From the discussion above, X 15’ ’ is not N as required by the present claims. However, the reference discloses the following general formula for the compound ([0081] - Formula I-1A): PNG media_image13.png 340 370 media_image13.png Greyscale , where ring A 10 can be ([0064] and Page 5 – A10-19) PNG media_image16.png 112 174 media_image16.png Greyscale , i.e. X 15’ ’ is N. Regarding claim 12, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, Z 3 is N. Regarding claim 13, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, L 1 is O. Regrading claim 14, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. In the compound disclosed by the reference: PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale , L 2 is a direct bond and not BR, NR, PR or CR as required by the present claim. However, the reference discloses the following general formula for the compound ([0081] – Formula I-1A): PNG media_image13.png 340 370 media_image13.png Greyscale , where T 2 can be N[(L 2 ) a2 -(R 3 ) b3 ], where L 2 is a single bond; and R 3 is hydrogen ([0021]-[0022] and [0029]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where L 2 in Formula I is NR, where R is hydrogen. Regrading claim 15, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. In the compound disclosed by the reference: PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale , R 1 is isopropyl and not deuterium as required by the present claims. However, the reference discloses the following general formula for the compound ([0081] – Formula I-1A): PNG media_image13.png 340 370 media_image13.png Greyscale , where E 1 can be deuterium ([0087]). Regarding claim 17, Bae et al discloses an organic light emitting device comprising first and second electrodes, i.e. an anode and a cathode ([0043]), and an organic layer disposed between the electrode ([0043]). The organic layer comprising the following compound ([0043] and Page 63 – Compound 85): PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale . This compound corresponds to the compound represented by formula I: PNG media_image8.png 336 318 media_image8.png Greyscale , where: M is Pt; ring B is a 6-membered carbocyclic ring; ring D is a 6-membered heterocyclic ring; Z 1 is C; Z 3 is N; X 1 to X 5 , X 8 to X 16 are C; L 1 is O; L 2 is a direct bond; R 1 is isopropyl; R 2 is H; R A represents two (2) C2 alkenyls that join to form a ring; R B and R C are hydrogen; R D is a combination of phenyl, i.e. aryl, and alkyl. In the compound disclosed by the reference ring C is not a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring as required by the present claims. However, the compound disclosed by the reference is but one embodiment and attention is directed to Formula 1-1 ([0014]): PNG media_image9.png 272 368 media_image9.png Greyscale , where ring A 20 can be a C 5-30 carbocyclic ring ([0019]). This ring is exemplified in a benzene ring in Compounds 299 and 300 (Page 98): PNG media_image10.png 208 228 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 240 250 media_image11.png Greyscale . Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where ring C in Formula I of the claims is a 6-carbocyclic ring where X 6 , X 7 and Z 2 are C. Although the compound comprises: PNG media_image1.png 222 156 media_image1.png Greyscale , R 1 is an isopropyl, and not tert-butyl, phenyl or d5-phenyl, and therefore, the compound is not required to meet provisions (1) to (3) recited in the present claims. Finally, it is noted that R 1 is isopropyl and R 2 is hydrogen, and therefore R 1 and R 2 are different as required by the present claims. While the reference fails to exemplify the presently claimed compound nor can the claimed compound be "clearly envisaged" from the reference as required to meet the standard of anticipation, nevertheless, in light of the overlap between the claimed compound and the compound disclosed by the reference, absent a showing of criticality for the presently claimed compound, it is urged that it would have been within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art, to use the compound which is both disclosed by the reference and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention. Regrading claim 18, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, the organic layer, i.e. the emitter layer, can comprise a host such as ([0266]-[0267] - CBP) PNG media_image17.png 122 262 media_image17.png Greyscale , i.e. a compound comprising a carbazole moiety. Regarding claim 20, Bae et al discloses an organic light emitting device, i.e. a consumer product, comprising first and second electrodes, i.e. an anode and a cathode ([0043]), and an organic layer disposed between the electrode ([0043]). The organic layer comprising the following compound ([0043] and Page 63 – Compound 85): PNG media_image7.png 358 436 media_image7.png Greyscale . This compound corresponds to the compound represented by formula I: PNG media_image8.png 336 318 media_image8.png Greyscale , where: M is Pt; ring B is a 6-membered carbocyclic ring; ring D is a 6-membered heterocyclic ring; Z 1 is C; Z 3 is N; X 1 to X 5 , X 8 to X 16 are C; L 1 is O; L 2 is a direct bond; R 1 is isopropyl; R 2 is H; R A represents two (2) C2 alkenyls that join to form a ring; R B and R C are hydrogen; R D is a combination of phenyl, i.e. aryl, and alkyl. In the compound disclosed by the reference ring C is not a 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic ring as required by the present claims. However, the compound disclosed by the reference is but one embodiment and attention is directed to Formula 1-1 ([0014]): PNG media_image9.png 272 368 media_image9.png Greyscale , where ring A 20 can be a C 5-30 carbocyclic ring ([0019]). This ring is exemplified in a benzene ring in Compounds 299 and 300 (Page 98): PNG media_image10.png 208 228 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 240 250 media_image11.png Greyscale . Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where ring C in Formula I of the claims is a 6-carbocyclic ring where X 6 , X 7 and Z 2 are C. Although the compound comprises: PNG media_image1.png 222 156 media_image1.png Greyscale , R 1 is an isopropyl, and not tert-butyl, phenyl or d5-phenyl, and therefore, the compound is not required to meet provisions (1) to (3) recited in the present claims. Finally, it is noted that R 1 is isopropyl and R 2 is hydrogen, and therefore R 1 and R 2 are different as required by the present claims. While the reference fails to exemplify the presently claimed compound nor can the claimed compound be "clearly envisaged" from the reference as required to meet the standard of anticipation, nevertheless, in light of the overlap between the claimed compound and the compound disclosed by the reference, absent a showing of criticality for the presently claimed compound, it is urged that it would have been within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art, to use the compound which is both disclosed by the reference and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al (US 2022/0106345) as applied to claims 1-6, 8-15, 17-18, and 20 above, and in view of Ma et al (US 2010/0237334) . The discussion with respect to Bae et al as set forth in Paragraph 18 above is incorporated here by reference. Regarding claim 19, Bae et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. While the reference discloses that the emitter layer comprises a host material, the reference does not disclose the particular hosts recited in the present claims. Ma et al discloses an OLED comprising an anode, cathode, and an organic light emitting layer between the anode and cathode (Abstract and [0098]). The light emitting layer comprises a triphenylene compound (Abstract and [0045] – Compound 1’), e.g. PNG media_image18.png 162 177 media_image18.png Greyscale . The reference discloses that triphenylene containing benzothiophenes are excellent host materials for OLEDs as well as improved stability ([0104]). Given that both Bae et al and Ma et al are drawn to organic electroluminescent devices comprising an emitter layer formed from a host and a dopant, in light of the particular advantages provided by the use and control of the triphenylene host as taught by Ma et al, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize such hosts in the device disclosed by Bae et al with a reasonable expectation of success . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-6, 8-15, and 17-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim s 1-5, 8, and 17-20 of copending Application No. 18/149,776 (published as US PGPub 2023/0159578) . Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the reasons given below. Claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/149,776 recites a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 1. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 2 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 2. Claim 3 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 3. Claim 4 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 4. Claim 5 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 5. Claim 8 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 6. Claim 1 and 3 of the copending application encompass the subject matter recited in instant claim 8. Claims 1 and 3 of the copending application encompass the subject matter recited in instant claim 9. Claims 1 and 3 of the copending application encompass the subject matter recited in instant claim 10. Claims 1 and 3 of the copending application encompass the subject matter recited in instant claim 11. Claim 1 the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 12. Claim 1 the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 13. Claim 1 the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 14. Claim 1 the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 15. Claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/149,776 recites an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 17. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 17 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 17. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 18 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 18. Claim 19 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 19. Claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/149,776 recites a consumer product comprising an organic light emitting device, where the organic light emitting device comprises an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 20. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 17 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 20 . This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-6, 8-15, and 17-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim s 1-5, 8, 12-13, and 17-20 of copending Application No. 17/899,649 (published as US PGPub 2023/0065887) . Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the reasons given below. Claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/149,776 recites a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 1. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 2 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 2. Claim 3 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 3. Claim 4 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 4. Claim 5 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 5. Claim 8 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 6. Claims 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 8. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 9. Claim 12 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 10. Claim 13 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 11. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 12. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 13. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 14. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 15. Claim 17 of copending Application No. 17/899,649 recites an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 17. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 17 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 17. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 18 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 18. Claim 19 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 19. Claim 20 of copending Application No. 17/899,649 recites a consumer product comprising an organic light emitting device, where the organic light emitting device comprises an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 20. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 17 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 20 . This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-6, 8-15, and 17-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim s 1-5, 8, and 17-20 of copending Application No. 18/475,852 (published as US PGPub 2024/0122059) . Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the reasons given below. Claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/475,852 recites a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 1. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 2 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 2. Claim 3 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 3. Claim 4 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 4. Claim 5 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 5. Claim 8 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 6. Claims 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 8. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 9. Claim 3 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 10. Claim 3 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 11. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 12. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 13. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 14. Claim 1 of the copending application encompasses the subject matter recited in instant claim 15. Claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/475,852 recites an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 17. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 17 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 17. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 18 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 18. Claim 19 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 19. Claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/475,852 recites a consumer product comprising an organic light emitting device, where the organic light emitting device comprises an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 20. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image19.png 236 218 media_image19.png Greyscale , where rings A, B, C, D are 5- or 6- membered carbocyclic of heterocyclic rings; one of Z 1 , Z 2 or Z 3 is N, and the remainder are C; X 1 to X 11 is C or N; L 1 and L 2 are direct bonds, BR, BRR’, etc., and R, R’ R”, R 1 , R 2 , R A , R B , R C , R D , and R E are hydrogen, or a substituent such as deuterium halogen, alkyls, etc. One of R 1 or R 2 has the substituent corresponding to one of Formulas II, III, or IV: PNG media_image20.png 28 146 media_image20.png Greyscale PNG media_image21.png 128 206 media_image21.png Greyscale PNG media_image22.png 100 172 media_image22.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 20 are C or N, Y A , Y B and Y C are CRR’ or SiRR’ and Q is C, Si, N, O, and B, Accordingly, claim 17 of the copending application encompasses the scope of instant claim 20 . This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-5 and 17-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim s 1, 3, and 17-20 of copending Application No. 18/440,512 (published as US PGPub 2024/0251656) . Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the reasons given below. Claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/440,512 recites a compound with the formula: PNG media_image23.png 286 320 media_image23.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 2 , X 7 to X 8 and X 31 to X 35 are C or N; Z 1 and Z 2 are C or N, Q 1 is -CR E1 R E2 R E3 , SiR E1 R E2 R E3 , etc. and R A , R B , R C , R D , R E1 , R E2 , R E3 , R 31 , R 33 , R, and R’ are hydrogen or a substituent such as deuterium, halogen ,alkyl etc. Claim 1 of the copending application does not recite that ring B and C are 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic rings as required by instant claim 1. However, claim 3 of copending application recites and ring B and C are benzene, pyridine, etc. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the rings recited in claim 3 of the copending application in the compound recited in claim 1 of copending application, and thereby, arrive at the compound recited in instant claim 1 with a reasonable expectation of success. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claims 1 and 3 encompass the subject matter recited instant claims 2-5. Claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/440,512 recites an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 17. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image23.png 286 320 media_image23.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 2 , X 7 to X 8 and X 31 to X 35 are C or N; Z 1 and Z 2 are C or N, Q 1 is -CR E1 R E2 R E3 , SiR E1 R E2 R E3 , etc. and R A , R B , R C , R D , R E1 , R E2 , R E3 , R 31 , R 33 , R, and R’ are hydrogen or a substituent such as deuterium, halogen ,alkyl etc. Claim 17 of the copending application does not recite that ring B and C are 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic rings as required by instant claim 17. However, claim 3 of copending application recites and ring B and C are benzene, pyridine, etc. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the rings recited in claim 3 of the copending application in the compound recited in claim 17 of copending application, and thereby, arrive at the compound recited in instant claim 17 with a reasonable expectation of success. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 18 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 18. Claim 19 of the copending application recites subject matter encompassing instant claim 19. Claim 20 of copending Application No. 18/440,512 recites a consumer product comprising an organic light emitting device, where the organic light emitting device comprises an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 20. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image23.png 286 320 media_image23.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 2 , X 7 to X 8 and X 31 to X 35 are C or N; Z 1 and Z 2 are C or N, Q 1 is -CR E1 R E2 R E3 , SiR E1 R E2 R E3 , etc. and R A , R B , R C , R D , R E1 , R E2 , R E3 , R 31 , R 33 , R, and R’ are hydrogen or a substituent such as deuterium, halogen ,alkyl etc. Claim 20 of the copending application does not recite that ring B and C are 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic rings as required by instant claim 20. However, claim 3 of copending application recites and ring B and C are benzene, pyridine, etc. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the rings recited in claim 3 of the copending application in the compound recited in claim 20 of copending application, and thereby, arrive at the compound recited in instant claim 20 with a reasonable expectation of success . This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-5 and 17-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim s 1, 3, and 17-20 of copending Application No. 19/016,802 . Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the reasons given below. Claim 1 of copending Application No. 19/016,802 recites a compound with the formula: PNG media_image23.png 286 320 media_image23.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 2 , X 7 to X 8 and X 31 to X 35 are C or N; Z 1 and Z 2 are C or N, Q 1 is -CR E1 R E2 R E3 , SiR E1 R E2 R E3 , etc. and R A , R B , R C , R D , R E1 , R E2 , R E3 , R 31 , R 33 , R, and R’ are hydrogen or a substituent such as deuterium, halogen ,alkyl etc. Claim 1 of the copending application does not recite that ring B and C are 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic rings as required by instant claim 1. However, claim 3 of copending application recites and ring B and C are benzene, pyridine, etc. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the rings recited in claim 3 of the copending application in the compound recited in claim 1 of copending application, and thereby, arrive at the compound recited in instant claim 1 with a reasonable expectation of success. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claims 1 and 3 encompass the subject matter recited instant claims 2-5. Claim 17 of copending Application No. 19/016,802 recites an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 17. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image23.png 286 320 media_image23.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 2 , X 7 to X 8 and X 31 to X 35 are C or N; Z 1 and Z 2 are C or N, Q 1 is -CR E1 R E2 R E3 , SiR E1 R E2 R E3 , etc. and R A , R B , R C , R D , R E1 , R E2 , R E3 , R 31 , R 33 , R, and R’ are hydrogen or a substituent such as deuterium, halogen ,alkyl etc. Claim 17 of the copending application does not recite that ring B and C are 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic rings as required by instant claim 17. However, claim 3 of copending application recites and ring B and C are benzene, pyridine, etc. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the rings recited in claim 3 of the copending application in the compound recited in claim 17 of copending application, and thereby, arrive at the compound recited in instant claim 17 with a reasonable expectation of success. Furthermore, it is noted that: Claim 18 of the copending application recites subject matter identical to instant claim 18. Claim 19 of the copending application recites subject matter encompassing instant claim 19. Claim 20 of copending Application No. 19/016,802 recites a consumer product comprising an organic light emitting device, where the organic light emitting device comprises an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the abode and cathode, identical to that recited in instant claim 20. The organic layer comprises a compound with the formula: PNG media_image23.png 286 320 media_image23.png Greyscale , where X 1 to X 2 , X 7 to X 8 and X 31 to X 35 are C or N; Z 1 and Z 2 are C or N, Q 1 is -CR E1 R E2 R E3 , SiR E1 R E2 R E3 , etc. and R A , R B , R C , R D , R E1 , R E2 , R E3 , R 31 , R 33 , R, and R’ are hydrogen or a substituent such as deuterium, halogen ,alkyl etc. Claim 20 of the copending application does not recite that ring B and C are 5- or 6-membered carbocyclic or heterocyclic rings as required by instant claim 20. However, claim 3 of copending application recites and ring B and C are benzene, pyridine, etc. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the rings recited in claim 3 of the copending application in the compound recited in claim 20 of copending application, and thereby, arrive at the compound recited in instant claim 20 with a reasonable expectation of success . This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER C. KOLLIAS whose telephone number is (571)-270-3869. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00AM – 5:00 PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Boyd can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ALEXANDER C KOLLIAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 2 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 3 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 4 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 5 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 7 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 8 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 9 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 10 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 11 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 12 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 13 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 14 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 15 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 16 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 17 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 18 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 19 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 20 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 21 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 22 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 23 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 24 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 25 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 26 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 27 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 28 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 29 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 30 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 31 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 33 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 34 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 35 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/303,707 Page 36 Art Unit: 1786
Prosecution Insights