DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Amendment filed 01/05/26.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The rejection of Claims 1-6 and 11-13 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (KR 10-2013-0074765) in view of Lee et al. (WO 2011/019156 A1) as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/07/25 is herein amended due to the Applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (KR 10-2013-0074765) in view of Lee et al. (WO 2011/019156 A1).
Regarding Claims 1-6, 11-13, and 15, Kim et al. discloses compounds of the following form:
PNG
media_image1.png
241
290
media_image1.png
Greyscale
([0022]) where Ar2 is the following (among others):
PNG
media_image2.png
157
131
media_image2.png
Greyscale
([0031]-[0037]). An embodiment is disclosed:
PNG
media_image3.png
173
177
media_image3.png
Greyscale
([0130]) (first compound). However, Kim et al. does not explicitly disclose an embodiment that fully reads on the Applicant’s Chemical Formula 1, particularly in regards to the position of the triazinyl group. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify compound B-69 such that it fully conforms to it, resulting in R6-8 = hydrogen, X = S, L2 = single bond, R4-5 = hydrogen, R3 = unsubstituted C6 aryl group (phenyl), L1 = single bond, and R1-2 = unsubstituted C6 aryl group (phenyl) of Applicant’s Chemical Formulae 1, 1C, and 1C-4; corresponds to 4 as recited in Claim 6 by the Applicant. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves change in the connection point of the triazinyl group, producing a positional isomer that can be expected to have highly similar chemical and physical properties; further motivation exists, as the modification merely involves selection of one possible embodiment selected from a highly finite list (in regards to the connection point of the triazinyl group) as envisioned from the scope of Kim et al.’s general formula, thus rendering the production predictable with a reasonable expectation of success. Notice a further minor modification to the bonding position of the dibenzothiophenyl to the carbazole would result in compound that corresponds to Applicant’s Formula 1C-2. Kim et al. further discloses an organic electroluminescent (EL) device comprising the following layers (in this order) for the construction of displays: anode (120), hole-injecting layer (170), hole-transporting layer (140), light-emitting layer (130), electron-transporting layer (150), electron-injecting layer (160), and cathode (110) (Fig. 5); its inventive compounds comprise the organic layers, including the hole-transporting layer and/or light-emitting layer ([0205]). However, Kim et al. does not explicitly disclose the second compound as recited by the Applicant.
Lee et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image4.png
214
132
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(page 9) (second compound) such that m = 0, R9-12 = hydrogen, L3-4 = single bond, Y1 = unsubstituted phenyl group, and Y2 = substituted phenyl group of Applicant’s Chemical Formula 2. Lee et al. discloses its inventive compounds as host material in the light-emitting layer of an organic EL device, the use of which results in a device with “very excellent operation life” ([9], [52]). It would have been obvious to incorporate the compound as disclosed by Lee et al. to the light-emitting layer as host material of the organic EL device as disclosed by Kim et al. The motivation is provided by the disclosure of Lee et al., which teaches that the use of its inventive material in such a manner results in a device with improved lifetime.
Regarding Claim 14, Lee et al. discloses that its inventive compounds correspond to the following formula:
PNG
media_image5.png
240
284
media_image5.png
Greyscale
([11]) where A15-19 = CR1 or N, m = 0-2, and Ar1 = substituted or unsubstituted C6-40 arylene ([13], [18]); substituents include deuterium ([25]). However, Lee et al. does not explicitly disclose a compound as recited in the claim. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify 62 as disclosed by Lee et al. (above) such that “substituted” refers replacement of (at least one) hydrogen by deuterium. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves the exchange of one atom (hydrogen) by a functional equivalent (deuterium) on the phenylene selected from a highly finite list as disclosed by Lee et al. (in regards to the nature of possible substituent groups) and easily envisioned from the scope of Lee et al.’s general formula; further motivation exists, including the fact that the substitution of hydrogen by deuterium (an isotope of nearly identical mass with an equivalent electronic configuration) can be expected to produce a compound with highly similar chemical and physical properties, thus rendering the production predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s arguments on pages 19-22 with respect to the deficiencies of the previously cited prior art have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as set forth above.
Conclusion
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1137. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6am-3pm.
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 A 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.
/JAY YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786