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 . Claims 1-21 are pending in this application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-10 and 17-20) in the reply filed on 06/10/2026 is acknowledged.
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 1-10 and 17-20 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:
a. Claim 1 and claims dependent thereon are rejected because the definition of X1-R9 is not clear. Applicants define variable X1 as a halogen atom or -O-R9, and R9 as -C(=O)R12, -C(=O)O-R12 or -P(=O)(-O-R12), but halogen atom is a monovalent substituent. What will happen if X1 is a halogen (i.e. halogen-R9)? Is this a typographical error? In addition, it is unclear how formula 4 is formed if X1 = halogen. See below.
PNG
media_image1.png
105
1293
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
283
935
media_image2.png
Greyscale
b. In claim 1 or elsewhere in the claims, the phrase “base in a solvent” is indefinite. What is covered and what is not? How can one tell if a given base or solvent is not covered by the claim? It is recommended that applicants recite specific bases and solvents as it was done claims 2-3.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claims 1, 4 and 19, the term “general” is not specific to describe a chemical formula. Applicants have to delete “general” from said claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement, filed on 04/23/2026, 08/13/2024 and 06/12/2024 has been acknowledged. Please refer to Applicant’s copies of the 1449 submitted herewith.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kahsay Habte Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)272-0667. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 - 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, JEFFREY MURRAY can be reached on 571-272-9023. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/Kahsay Habte/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1624
July 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights