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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the compound in pages 117 and 118 in the reply filed on August 19, 2026 is acknowledged. The elected compound is named “Emitter 1” in the specification, Table 1, page 118. Both compounds of Table 1, “Emitter 1” and “Emitter 2” were not found in the prior art and are allowable.
Improper Markush Rejection
Claims 1-20 are rejected under a judicially created doctrine as being drawn to an improper Markush group, that is, the claims lack unity of invention. The variables X1-X10, Y1-Y2, K1-K4, A1-A4 and L1-L4 are defined in such a way that they keep changing the core of the compound that determines the classification. By changing these values, several patentably distinct and independent compounds are claimed. In order to have unity of invention the compounds must have “a community of chemical or physical characteristics” which justify their inclusion in a common group, and that such inclusion is not repugnant to principles of scientific classification” In re JONES (CCPA) 74 USPQ 149 (see footnote 2). The structural Formula (I) does not have a significant structural feature that is shared by all of its alternatives which is inventive. The structure has only a single N in a ring as common. This feature is not inventive. Compounds embraced by Formula (I) are so diverse in nature that a prior art anticipating a claim with respect to one member under 35 USC 102 would not render obvious the same claim under 35 USC 103. This is evidentiary of patentably distinct and independent inventions.
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 13-15, 18 and 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.
i) In claim 13, the definitions of LA’ and Ly are defined as “selected from the group consisting of structures shown below (LIST 1) and LIST 2” and selected from the group consisting of structures shown below (LIST 3) and LIST 4,” respectively. There is, however, no structure for these groups or any other definition. Appropriate correction is required. Also, the phrase “from the General substituents as defined herein; and any two substituents can be fused or joined to form a ring” is unclear. Are these definitions narrowing any previous limitation? If not, the phrase is confusing and superfluous because the definitions of variables carry over into dependent claims unless there is a clear further narrowing. See also claims 14 and 15. Similar language is present in claim 18.
ii) In claim 20 it is not known what else is present in the formulation. A formulation necessarily requires the presence of additional ingredients to distinguish it from the compound.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCK KIFLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0668. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 6 PM, M-F.
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 H. Murray can be reached at 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 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.
October 5, 2026
/BRUCK KIFLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1624
Prosecution Insights