DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 24, 2025 has been entered.
The claim set dated December 3, 2025 is now entered. Claims 27 and 28 were added. Claims 1, 6-13, and 24-28 are pending.
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.
Claims 1, 6-9, 11-13, and 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20160059609 A (Note: A machine translation was provided with a previous office action).
Regarding independent claims 1 and 24, KR ‘609 teaches diamine compounds. The compounds are for use in a hole transport layer of an organic light emitting element, which also contains an emitting layer and electron transport layer (see title, abstract, Figure 100, and figure description at page 111 of translation copy and see Comparative Examples 3 to 5 at pages 107-108 of translation copy) per claims 1 and 24-26. The diamine structural formula 2 is according to the following (see pg. 7-8 of translation copy and more specifically may include structures on pages 11-14):
PNG
media_image1.png
188
270
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Group definitions are provide on pages 8-9 and 14 of translation copy. L8 may be C6 phenylene (see page 8 of translation) and “h” may be two (see page 8 of translation copy). Specific Formula 2 compounds include at least the two following compounds #2-14 and 2-16 (see translation copy page 33):
PNG
media_image2.png
294
334
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
273
297
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
The example compound #2-16 above shows that a biphenyl core is not required to bond in para-positions as shown in 2-14. The example compound 2-14 above show that Formula 2 Ar3 to Ar6 groups may be selected as dibenzothiophene group per instant group Formula 2 and groups may be selected as aryl group (phenyl) per instant Ar2, Ar2 and/or Ar3. Also, further example compounds of Formula 2 teach selection of dibenzofuran groups.
While not shown in combination in an example compound of the reference, KR ‘609 teaches the Formula 2 core L8 group may be selected as biphenylene group (when L8 is phenylene and “h” is 2) and KR ‘609 Ar3 to Ar6 may be selected as aryl groups such as phenyl and dibenzthiophene groups as shown within compound 2-14. The specific instant compound biphenyl bonding pattern (including an ortho bond) as required by instant formulas 1-2 to 1-4 and within compounds of instant claim 24 is within the general formula 2 teaching of a “L8”-core biphenylene arylene group. Given the teachings of the reference with respect to Formula 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have formed a compound of the reference, choosing as the compound, that as described above with a biphenylene core bonding the same as instant 1-2 to 1-4 and having selected Ar3 to Ar6 groups, wherein the resultant compound would also meet limitations of the instant claims. Additionally, 2-14 and 2-16 show biphenylene positional isomer group structures to claimed instant formula 1-2 to 1-4 structures and per MPEP 2144.09, compounds which are position isomers (compounds having the same radicals in physically different positions on the same nucleus) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. In re Wilder, 563 F.2d 457, 195 USPQ 426 (CCPA 1977). See also In re May, 574 F.2d 1082, 197 USPQ 601 (CCPA 1978) (stereoisomers prima facie obvious). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have formed Formula 2 compounds with any bonding pattern of core biphenylene group, because one would expect to achieve a functional compound according to formula 2 with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Groups within specific compounds of claim 13 are discussed above with respect to KR ‘609 formula 2. Further example compounds are discussed below with respect to corresponding groups that may be selected for a formula 2 including but not limited to the following:
Compounds #2-95 and 2-14 show groups corresponding to instant compounds. Compound #2-103 shows a linking phenylene per instant L-1. Compound #2-103 shows selection of a dibenzofuran group with bonding per instant group formula 2-1 and compound 2-14 corresponds to a dibenzothiophene group with bonding per instant formula 2-2. Compounds #2-14, 2-95, and 2-103 comprise groups corresponding to instant formula 2-a. Compounds #2-14, 2-95 and 2-103 each comprise a O or S-containing heteroaryl group corresponding to an instant Ar2 or Ar3.
Regarding claim 6, compound 2-103 shows a selected linking phenylene per instant group L-1.
Regarding claim 7, compound 2-103 shows a selected dibenzofuran group with bonding per instant group formula 2-1.
Regarding claim 8, see groups within 2-95 and 2-103 corresponding to instant formula 2-a.
Regarding claim 11, both 2-95 and 2-103 show a O or S-containing heteroaryl group corresponding to an instant Ar2 or Ar3.
Regarding claims 6 and 27, linking “L” groups are defined to include 6 to 60 carbon atoms (see page 8 in translation). The taught KR ‘609 arylene range includes instant L2 of 10 carbon atoms and instant L3 of 14 carbon atoms. (Note that naphthalene group is demonstrated as a known arylene group within compound 2-64 and phenanthrene is demonstrated as a known arylene group in the art within compound 2-66 – page 16 translation copy).
Regarding claims 7 and 28, formula 2 included dibenzofuran or dibenzothiophene groups are discussed above. Substitution groups are also discussed. Note that compounds of formula 2 may have at least R7 or R8 substituent groups as C6 to C24 aryl (see page 14 translation copy), which includes phenyl at any portion of a dibenzofuran or dibenzothiophene heteroaryl group.
Regarding claim 12, example devices comprise an emitting layer including 9, 10-di(naphthalene-2-yl) anthracene (see top paragraph on page 108 of translation copy). The anthracene derivative corresponds to instant formula E-1 where each R31 to R38 are selected as hydrogen and pairs of R39s and pairs of R40s each combine to each form naphthyl groups at the 9 and 10 positions of the anthracene core.
Regarding claim 9, while not shown in combination in an example compound of the reference, KR ‘609 teaches Formula 2 Ar3 to Ar6 group(s) may be selected as a deuterated aryl group
PNG
media_image4.png
75
104
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(see page 40 of translation copy).
as shown within compounds 2-67 and 2-68 of KR ‘609. Given the teachings of the reference with respect to Formula 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have formed a compound of the reference, choosing as the compound, that as described above with a deuterated aryl group, wherein the resultant compound would also meet limitations of instant claims 9 and 20.
With respect to the layered device structures of claims 1 and 24-26, KR ‘609 teaches devices may be formed comprising an ITO anode, hole injection layer, hole transport layer – comprising a single material comprised of a formula 2 compound, light emitting layer, electron transport layer, electron injecting layer, and a cathode (see Example 1 description then see the teachings in Comparative Examples 3 to 5 teaching a hole transport layer may be formed of a single formula 2 compound – see page 107 of translation copy to page 108 of translation copy). Comparative Examples 3 to 5 result in operational device structures emitting light and having useful lifetime. Please note MPEP 2123 sets forth nonpreferred and alternative embodiments constitute prior art and a reference is relevant for all it teaches. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed a light emitting device with the layered structure taught by Comparative Examples 3 to 5 comprising a single material of a Formula 2 compound as specifically discussed above wherein the resultant device and materials would also meet the limitations of the instant claims, because one would expect such a device structure to provide an operational light emitting device predictably using the formula 2 compound(s) for hole transportation. One would expect to achieve a device having a hole transport layer comprised of a single material with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20160059609 A in view of Yokoyama et al. (US 2012/0292609 A1).
KR 20160059609 A is relied upon as set forth above for the rejections of claim 1.
KR ‘609 teaches Formula 2 compounds as discussed above per instant Formula 1-2 to 1-4. KR ‘609 generally teaches “substituted” may include “heavy hydrogen” (i.e., deuterium) (see translation copy page 6), but does not specifically discuss adding deuterium atoms as substituents on the core “L8” arylene group of Formula 2. In analogous art, Yokoyama et al. teaches core biphenylene groups of a diarylamine compound for an organic electroluminescent device may comprise R11 to R18 substituent variables as deuterium atoms (see Yokoyama par. 23) and the advantage of substituting with deuterium compared to no substitution with deuterium is great improvement of lifetime of a device and improved driving voltage, luminous efficiency, and power efficiency (see Yokoyama par. 22, 149-151). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have fully deuterated the biphenylene “L8” group of a KR ‘609 diarylamine compound according to KR ‘609, because Yokoyama et al. teaches deuterating a diarylamine compound for use in an organic light emitting device and one would expect deuteration of KR ‘609 compounds to provide improved lifetime characteristics of a device including the deuterated compounds. One would expect to achieve functional compounds according to the teachings of KR ‘609 and Yokoyama for an operational light emitting device with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 3, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues KR ‘609 teaches away from light emitting devices comprising a hole transport layer consisting only of a formula 2 compound. The office maintains KR ‘609 teaches formula 2 compounds for the purpose of hole transportation. The KR ‘609 comparative device examples show devices are operable comprising only a single hole transporting compound. The comparative examples show compounds of a formula 2 are predictably functional as hole transporting material in a device structure. The reference provides motivation for using the formula 2 compounds for the purpose of hole transportation. In response to applicant's argument that KR ‘609 teaches away from only using formula 2 compounds alone rather than the preferred combination with another compound in mixture, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
The office further notes applicant has not provided a clear showing of new and unexpected results with respect to claimed compounds in a device structure commensurate in scope with the claims. This includes specific compounds of new claims 27 and 28, which are also considered obvious over KR ‘609.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yabunouchi et al. (US 2007/0278938 A1) sets forth amine compounds considered relevant to the field of the endeavor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dawn Garrett whose telephone number is (571)272-1523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday (Eastern Time).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 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.
/DAWN L GARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights