“…However, these methods suffer from drawbacks such as long reaction time, the use of a large quantity of volatile organic solvents, harsh refluxing conditions and lower yields. Thus, chemists have developed several alternative and more efficient methods for the synthesis of polyhydroquinoline and 1,8-dioxodecahydroacridine derivatives which include the use of microwave irradiation [11], HClO 4 .SiO 2 [12], molecular iodine [13], ionic liquids [14], NH 4 Cl or Zn(OAc) 2 [15], organocatalysts [16], scolecite [17], HY-zeolite [18], p-TSA [19], montmorillonite K10 clay [20] [27], sulfamic acid [28], so- One-Pot Synthesis of 1,8-Dioxodecahydroacridines and Polyhydroquinoline using 1,3-Di (bromo or chloro)-5,5-Dimethylhydantoin 291 lar thermal energy [29], carbon-based solid acid (CBSA) [30], ZnO [31], HCM-41 [32] and fluoro alcohols (TFE or HFIP) [33]. But some of those methods still have their own limitations in terms of yields, long reaction time, acidic or basic catalysis, tedious or difficult work-up, anhydrous organic solvents.…”