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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawakami et al (US 2018/0287074) (Kawakami).
In reference to claims 1-5 and 7-11, Kawakami teaches a device of light emitting element 1 (Kawakami table 1) comprising the compound 101 shown below that reads on the instant claims.
PNG
media_image1.png
484
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While the prior art does not refer to the layers as the same name as the layers in the instant claims, the layers have the claimed composition and therefore meet the claim limitations. Recitation of a new name for a component does not separate it from a component in the prior art with the same composition and structure.
For Claim 1: Reads on formula 1 wherein H1 is H, Y is a group of chemical formula 1-2, m is 0 and Ar3 is a substituted phenyl.
For Claim 2: Reads on chemical formula 2.
For Claim 5: Reads on R1 to R8 are each hydrogen.
For Claim 7-11: Reads on a device with comprising the material in an organic layer including the claimed layers.
In reference to claims 3-4, the claim further limits the chemical formula 3, which is an optional embodiment of claim 2 (i.e. chemical formula 2 or chemical formula 3) and therefore not required. As such, claims 3-4 are rejected based on similar reasons to claim 1.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (CN 110317206) (Chen).
In reference to claims 1-2 and 5-7, Chen teaches the compound 43 as shown below (Chen p. 5).
PNG
media_image2.png
120
214
media_image2.png
Greyscale
This compound is identical to the instantly claimed compound except that amine group is bonded to a different position on the fused heterocyclic group, that is the compounds are positional isomers. It is noted that 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). In light of the case law cited above, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the compound disclosed in the present claims is but an obvious variant of the compound presently claimed, and thereby one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention.
For Claim 1: Reads on formula 1 wherein H1 is H, Y is a group of chemical formula 1-1, m is 0 and Ar1 and Ar2 are each dimethyl fluorenyl is a substituted phenyl.
For Claim 2: Reads on chemical formula 2.
For Claim 5: Reads on R1 to R8 are each hydrogen.
For Claim 6: Reads on compound 938.
For Claim 7-11: Reads on a device with comprising the material in an organic layer including the claimed layers.
In reference to claims 3-4, the claim further limits the chemical formula 3, which is an optional embodiment of claim 2 (i.e. chemical formula 2 or chemical formula 3) and therefore not required. As such, claims 3-4 are rejected based on similar reasons to claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean M DeGuire whose telephone number is (571)270-1027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 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.
/Sean M DeGuire/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights