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 .
The preliminary amendment received November 7, 2022 is entered. The amendments to the specification and abstract are acknowledged. Claims 1, 4, 11, and 15 were amended. Claims 1-15 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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 101890719 B1 (hereinafter “KR ‘719”) (Note: A Google Patents machine translation is provided with this office communication).
Regarding independent claim 1, KR ‘719 teaches compounds according to general Formula (1) (see translation copy page 1):
PNG
media_image1.png
146
354
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
In the formula (1), Ar1 and Ar2 are independently aryl groups that may be substituted, R1 and R2 may be a substituent, and integers m and n are independently 0 to 8 (see translation copy page 1). Note that “at least one hydrogen” in the compound of formula (1) “may be substituted with deuterium” (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1) and the office considers “at least one” to include up to a maximum number of deuteriums present within the formula (1) compounds. With respect to instant group Q, the formula (1) compounds comprise a corresponding linking naphthalene group in the formula core structure. The Ar1 and Ar2 groups of KR ‘719 may be at least phenyl and naphthyl groups per instant groups Ar1 and Ar2 (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1). Note that each of instant subscripts n1 to n4 may be zero and accordingly, instant groups L1 to L4 are not required to be present.
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the specifically bonded naphthalene group in the middle linking portion of KR ‘719 formula 1 is the same as instant claim 2 Q group “2j”:
PNG
media_image2.png
82
98
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(see formula 1 on page 1 of translation copy).
Regarding claims 3, 4, and 10, KR ‘719 shows corresponding independent Ar1 and Ar2 aryl groups may be phenyl, 1-naphthyl, or 2-naphthyl (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy). Note that “at least one hydrogen” in the compound of formula (1) “may be substituted with deuterium” (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1) and the office considers “at least one” to include up to a maximum number of deuteriums present within the formula (1) compounds.
Regarding claims 5, 10, and 12, instant L1 and L2 are not required to be present when instant n1 and n2 are zero. Compounds of KR ‘719 meet the claim limitations for groups of instant formula 1 (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy).
Regarding claims 6 and 10, KR ‘719 shows corresponding linking groups that are phenylene (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy). Note that “at least one hydrogen” in the compound of formula (1) “may be substituted with deuterium” (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1) and the office considers “at least one” to include up to a maximum number of deuteriums present within the formula (1) compounds.
Regarding claims 7 and 10, compounds of KR ‘719 meet values of linking groups corresponding to integer values as claimed (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy).
Regarding claims 8-10, note that “at least one hydrogen” in the compound of formula (1) “may be substituted with deuterium” (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1) and the office considers “at least one” to include up to a maximum number of deuteriums (i.e., 100% deuterium substitution rate) present within the formula (1) compounds.
Regarding claim 11, at least KR ‘719 compound (1-10) of formula (1) shows corresponding groups where both Ar1 and Ar2 are 1-naphthyl (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy). Regarding claim 13, compound (1-10) of formula (1) shows corresponding groups to instant L3 and L4 groups where both are para-phenylene (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy).
PNG
media_image3.png
130
280
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, the core structure of specific compound (1-33) of formula 1 is the same as instant Formula J2 (see Chemical Formula 5 specific formula 1 compounds beginning at page 5 of translation copy):
PNG
media_image4.png
124
218
media_image4.png
Greyscale
.
Further note, that “at least one hydrogen” in a compound of formula (1) “may be substituted with deuterium” (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1).
Regarding claim 15, KR ‘719 teaches the formula 1 compounds are for a light emitting layer of a light emitting device structure (see page 2 of translation copy).
While KR ‘719 does not appear to exemplify a formula 1 compound with at least one deuterium, KR ‘719 clearly teaches “at least one hydrogen” in the compound of formula (1) “may be substituted with deuterium” (see bottom portion of translation copy page 1) as discussed above. Given the teachings of the reference, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form deuterated compounds of formula 1 where resultant compounds would also meet the limitations of the instant claims. One would expect to achieve an operational light emitting devices with formula 1 compounds within the disclosure of KR ‘719 with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ermolaev, V. L. (2016). The influence of deuteration of complex organic molecules on their fluorescence quantum yield (a review). Optics and Spectroscopy, 121(4), 567-584.
The reference discusses properties of hydrocarbon compounds when deuterated. The reference is considered relevant to the state of the art.
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