DETAILED ACTION
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 .
According to paper filed on March 3, 2026, the applicants have amended claims 5 and 15.
Claims 5 and 7-19 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see paper, filed March 3, 2026, with respect to claims 5 and 7-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, all rejections are withdrawn since the applicants have amended claims to overcome indefiniteness and Improper Markush Group rejections.
NEW GROUNDS OF REJECTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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 5 and 7-19 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.
In independent claim 5, the values of variables L1, L2 and L3 are defined. However, according to amended claim 5, variable L1 is absent and variables L2 and L3 represent single bonds only.
In independent claim 5, last line, the term - - L5 and L6 are each not a single bond - - is vague and indefinite since according to the values defined for variables L5 and L6, they cannot represent a single bond.
Claim 7 depends upon claim 5 and further defines variable L1 to be present and therefore, lacks antecedent basis since variable L1 is absent in amended claim 5.
In claim 15, variable R9 is defined. However, this variable is not present in amended claim 15.
Claim 15 depends upon claim 5 and further defines the value of variable X2 as NR, S=O, O=S=O, Se=O and O=Se=O in addition to other values. However, according to amended claim 5, X2 cannot represent NR, S=O, O=S=O, Se=O and O=Se=O and therefore, lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "N for the value of variable X2" in claim 5 (see first two complexes in 2nd row on page 13 and 3rd row on page 14). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "light emitting diode" in claim 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "light emitting diode" in claim 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 CHARANJIT AULAKH whose telephone number is (571)272-0678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-3:30.
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, Clinton A Brooks can be reached at 571-270-7682. 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.
/CHARANJIT AULAKH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621