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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the species comprising compound HT-1 of compound of formula 1 and compound BH-1 as the species of Formula 2 in the reply filed on 7/1/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim 5 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/1/2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings filed 12/02/2021 are accepted.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4 and 6-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2017/061480 (herein US 10,464,895 is used as an English equivalent thereof and is referred to as “Kato”) in view of WO-2010/071362 (herein referred to as “KR”) and Je et al (US 8,541,113).
Kato teaches an organic light emitting device comprising an anode; a cathode; and light emitting layer between said electrodes (see Background of the invention). The device may comprise
a first organic material layer between the anode and the cathode, wherein the first organic material layer includes a compound represented by of the following Chemical Formula 1 (col 121, 46+; column 26). Said specie reads on applicant’s elected species :
PNG
media_image1.png
329
292
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kato teaches the device should comprise a second organic material layer. The second organic material layer is a light emitting layer, and the first organic material layer is provided between the light emitting layer and the anode (col 122, 57+). Kato but does not teach that the light emitting layer should comprise the chemical of formula II. However, KR teaches deuterated anthracene derivatives exhibit improved efficiency, driving voltage, and lifetime (abstract) when they are adopted as the light emitting host material of an organic light emitting device.
PNG
media_image2.png
271
182
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(6-2). Said layer may further comprise a dopant. Therefore, the organic light emitting device according to the present invention exhibits excellent characteristics in terms of luminous efficiency, brightness, power efficiency, driving voltage, thermal stability, and lifespan, and thus has a great effect in maximizing performance and improving lifetime in full color organic EL panels. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the deuterated anthracene derivative taught by KR as a light emitting layer in the device disclosed by Kato because said compounds exhibit improved efficiency, driving voltage, and lifetime (abstract).
Said reference are relied upon as above, but do not teach the light emitting layer should comprise compound BD-1 as a dopant. However, Je teaches the claimed BD-1 compound ( taught as BD62 in column 80) may be include in a light emitting layer (col 46, lines 56+) of an electroluminescent material in addition to anthracene derivates (cols 47+). Said compounds provide devices with high color purity of blue light and long life characteristics (abstract) and is utilized as a dopant. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add the claimed BD-1 compound to the light emitting layer taught by Kato in view of KR. The motivation for doing so would have been such compounds are taught to have been because said compounds provide devices with high color purity of blue light and long life characteristics (abstract).
With regards to claim 3, the Arl and Ar2 are the same as or different from each other and read on the claimed options.
With regards to claim 4, the species noted above reads on chemical formula 1-1.
With regards to claim 6, the species disclosed by KR reads on said limitations.
With regard to claim 7, the elected species taught by the prior art read on chemical formula 2-3.
With regard to claim 8, the elected species taught by the prior art read on chemical formula 2-5.
6. (Original) The organic light emitting device of Claim 1, wherein R3 is deuterium, and cis 8.
With regards to claims 9 and 10, KR teaches the compound represented by of Chemical Formula 2 is substituted with deuterium by 80% or greater.
With regard to claim 11, the elected species taught by the prior art read on chemical formula A-2.
With regards to claim 14, Kato teaches the second organic material layer should be in contact with the first organic material layer (col 123+).
With regards to claim 15, Kato teaches the organic light emitting device further comprising one or more organic material layers among a hole transfer layer, a hole injection layer, an electron blocking layer, an electron transfer and injection layer, an electron transfer layer, an electron injection layer, a hole blocking layer, and a hole transfer and injection layer (column 123 and 124).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 KEVIN R KRUER whose telephone number is (571)272-1510. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at (571) 272-1123. 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.
/KEVIN R KRUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787