DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamura (US 20120132899 A1).
Regarding Claims 1-5, Kawamura teaches a material represented by Compound 31 (page 5):
PNG
media_image1.png
246
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
472
422
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compound 31 shows R groups R401-R416 which are represented by a finite set of substituent options. The substituent options are viewed as functionally equivalent whereby upon selection gives rise to obvious variants of generic Compound 31.
One such option reading on applicants’ Formula 1 and
PNG
media_image3.png
154
136
media_image3.png
Greyscale
shows R405 and R412 are bonded to an arylene L1 (6 carbons); R404 and R407 (corresponding to applicants’ Ar1 andAr2)= an aryl group (6 to 30 carbons);R11 (corresponding to applicants’ R1) = alkyl (1 to 10 carbons), R406 (corresponding to applicants’ R4) along with the remaining R (s) = H; c and d = 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to have made a variety of derivatives of generic Compound 31 by selecting various functional equivalent substituents which would have included the above variant which reads on the instant limitations, absent unexpected results (per claims 1-5).
Regarding Claims 6-7, Kawamura teaches an organic electroluminescence device comprising an electron-injecting layer and/or an electron-transporting layer between an emitting layer and a cathode, wherein at least one layer of the electron-injecting layer and the electron-transporting layer comprises the nitrogen-containing heterocyclic derivative (Compound 31) (paragraph 20, section 17) (per claims 6-7).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY D CLARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7087. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-4PM M-F.
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 Chriss 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GREGORY D CLARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786