Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/466,622

METAL-ASSISTED MULTI-RESONANCE THERMALLY-ACTIVATED DELAYED-FLUORESCENCE EMITTERS FOR OLED APPLICATIONS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Sep 13, 2023
Priority
Sep 16, 2022 — provisional 63/407,263
Examiner
NGUYEN, VU ANH
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Hong Kong Quantum AI Lab Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
1272 granted / 1528 resolved
+23.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1534
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
40.7%
+0.7% vs TC avg
§102
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
§112
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1528 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 38 refers to the electronic component of claim 36 and specifies a method of fabricating the light-emitting layer. What is being claimed is a product and the determination of the patentability of a product is generally independent of any method of making. Since the product of claim 36 does not appear to be altered in any way by the fabrication process of claim 38, claim 38 has an improper independent form. 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. Claims 1-4, 6-15, 17, 30 and 34-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0288271 A1 to Hamze et al. Regarding claim 1, Hamze et al. discloses an OLED comprising a metal complex exemplified by the following compound (abstract and page 41): PNG media_image1.png 408 802 media_image1.png Greyscale which is representative of the claimed compound wherein X1, Y and X2 are respectively N, B, N; A-E are benzene rings; c1-c5, X1’, X2’, J and G are absent; each of D and E forms a dative bond with formula II wherein M = Au and formula IIa is similar to the 4th group in claim 8. Claim 1 is therefore unpatentable. See MPEP § 2131.02(II). So are claims 2-4, 6-7, 9-15, 17, 30 and 34-35. The 3rd compound in claim 8 is met by the first compound on page 30. The features of claims 36-41 are disclosed at pages 49-50, 55 and 63. Other Prior Art of Record The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2020/0388774 A1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5, 16, 18-29 and 31-33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The invention as described in these claims is not disclosed, suggested, or made obvious by Hamze et al., which represents the closest prior art of record, either alone or in combination with other prior art teachings. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VU ANH NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5454. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 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, ROBERT JONES can be reached at (571) 270-7733. 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. /VU A NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 13, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12751203
HETEROCYCLIC ARYLAMINE COMPOUND, ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT DEVICE AND DISPLAY PANEL
3y 10m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12751205
COMPOUND FOR ORGANIC ELECTRONIC ELEMENT, ORGANIC ELECTRONIC ELEMENT USING THE SAME, AND AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE THEREOF
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12751202
ORGANIC ELECTRIC ELEMENT COMPRISING A PLURALITY OF EMISSION-AUXILIARY LAYERS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING IT
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12745555
DISPLAY ELEMENT
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12740225
LIGHT-EMITTING ELEMENT AND DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.9%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1528 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month