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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/02/2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 10-16 in the reply filed on 04/09/2024 was previously acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 were withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 04/09/2024.
The elected species reads on claims 10-11, 13-14, and 16-20.
Response to Amendment
The applicant's amendment of 01/02/2026 has been entered.
Claims 10-11 and 17-18 are amended due to the applicant's amendment.
Claims 1-11, 13-14, and 16-20 are pending and claims 1-9 remain withdrawn from consideration.
The rejection of claims 10-11, 13-14, and 16-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shirasaki et al. US-20210009527-A1 as set forth in the previous Office action is overcome due to the applicant's amendment. The rejection is withdrawn.
However, as outlined below, new grounds of rejection have been made over Shirasaki.
Response to Arguments
Insofar as the arguments apply to the new grounds of rejection outlined below, the applicant's arguments on pages 8-9 of the reply dated 01/02/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 10-11, 13-14, and 16-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shirasaki et al. US-20210009527-A1 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's argument – The applicant argues on pages 8-9 that the rejections set forth in the previous Office action are overcome due to the applicant's amendments to the claims and Shirasaki does not provide a reason to modify the previously cited compound to arrive at the claimed compound.
Examiner's response -- The claims did not previously require the amended limitations of wherein the substituents of A2 are unsubstituted or substituted with a phosphine oxide group or CN and the amended limitations are met in the new grounds of rejection below over Shirasaki. Briefly, as discussed in greater detail in the rejection below, Shirasaki teaches that Ar1-Ar2 and Ar3-Ar4 of Shirasaki's formula (1) may be selected from groups of formula (a1) to (a11), which include both a phenyl and a biphenyl group and include both an anthracene group substituted with a biphenyl group and an anthracene group substituted with a phenyl group (¶ [0427]) and Shirasaki teaches exemplary compounds wherein these positions are these specific groups. It would have been obvious to substitute the positions Ar1-Ar2 or Ar3-Ar4 in one of Shirasaki's specifically exemplified compounds to arrive at the claimed compound because it would have been the substitution would have been one known element for another.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10-11, 13-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirasaki et al. US-20210009527-A1 (hereinafter "Shirasaki").
Regarding claims 10-11, 13-14, and 16-20, Shirasaki teaches an electron transporting material for an organic electroluminescence device of a formula (1) (¶ [0007]). Shirasaki teaches that the compound causes an organic electroluminescence device comprising it to have high luminous efficiency (¶ [0025]). Shirasaki teaches specific examples of the compound of formula (1) including those on pages 54 and 157, see for example
PNG
media_image1.png
184
322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 54) and
PNG
media_image2.png
302
330
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 157).
Shirasaki does not specifically disclose a compound of the claimed formula (III). For example, the first compound shown above differs from the claimed compound in that the positions Ar1-Ar2 is a biphenyl group instead of a phenyl group. However, Shirasaki teaches that Ar1-Ar2 and Ar3-Ar4 of Shirasaki's formula (1) may be selected from groups of formula (a1) to (a11), which include both a phenyl and a biphenyl group (¶ [0427]) and Shirasaki teaches exemplary compounds wherein Ar1-Ar2 is a phenyl group, such as in the compounds on page 157.
Therefore, given the general formula and teachings of Shirasaki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the biphenyl in the position Ar1-Ar2 in the above first compound with an unsubstituted phenyl group, because Shirasaki teaches the variable may suitably be selected as such. The substitution would have been one known element for another and one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would reasonably expect the predictable result that the modified compound would be useful in the device of Shirasaki and possess the benefits of high luminous efficiency. See MPEP § 2143.I.(B).
Alternatively, the second compound shown above differs from the claimed compound in that the position Ar3-Ar4 is an anthracene group substituted with a biphenyl group instead of a phenyl group. However, Shirasaki teaches that Ar1-Ar2 and Ar3-Ar4 of Shirasaki's formula (1) may be selected from groups of formula (a1) to (a11), which include both an anthracene group substituted with a biphenyl group and an anthracene group substituted with a phenyl group (¶ [0427]) and Shirasaki teaches exemplary compounds wherein Ar3-Ar4 is an anthracene group substituted with a phenyl group, such as in the compounds on page 54.
Therefore, given the general formula and teachings of Shirasaki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the anthracene group substituted with a biphenyl group in the position Ar3-Ar4 in the above second compound with an anthracene group substituted with a phenyl group, because Shirasaki teaches the variable may suitably be selected as such. The substitution would have been one known element for another and one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would reasonably expect the predictable result that the modified compound would be useful in the device of Shirasaki and possess the benefits of high luminous efficiency. See MPEP § 2143.I.(B).
The modified compound of Shirasaki is a compound of the claimed general formula (III) wherein:
A2 is an anthracene substituted with an unsubstituted C6 aryl group;
X2 is a phenylene;
Y4 to Y6 are each N;
G is an unsubstituted C12 heteroaryl group comprising at least one 5-memebred ring wherein the heteroatom is S (a dibenzothiophene); and
R3 is an unsubstituted C6 aryl (a phenyl group).
The modified compound of Shirasaki meets claims 10-11, 13-14, and 16-20.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth M. Dahlburg whose telephone number is 571-272-6424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET, and alternate Fridays.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached on 571-272-7783. 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.
/ELIZABETH M. DAHLBURG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786