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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/18/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The rejection of Claims 1-6, 9, and 11-17, and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahashi et al. (WO 2020/111253 A1) as set forth in the Final Rejection filed 06/23/26 is overcome by the Applicant’s amendments.
The rejection of Claims 8 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (WO 2020/111253 A1) as set forth in the Final Rejection filed 06/23/26 is overcome by the Applicant’s amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
The claim, which is dependent on Claim 1, recites numerous amine compounds which lie outside the scope of Applicant’s Formula 1 as defined in the parent claim. For example, the claim recites C60 that does not comprise the FG group represented by any one of Applicant’s Formulae 2-5. The Applicant should ensure that every single amine compound as recited in Claim 10 fully lies within the scope of Formula 1 as recited in Claim 1.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahashi et al. (WO 2020/111253 A1).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of WIPO publication WO 2020/111253 A1 (herein referred to as “Takahashi et al.”) as the English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Takahashi et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image1.png
182
196
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 169 of Takahashi et al.) (corresponds to Applicant’s A37).
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.
Claims 1-6, 9-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (WO 2020/111253 A1).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of WIPO publication WO 2020/111253 A1 (herein referred to as “Takahashi et al.”) as the English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Regarding Claims 1-6, 9, 11-17, and 19, Takahashi et al. discloses an organic electroluminescent (EL) device (light emitting element) comprising the following layers: substrate (2), anode (3), first hole-transporting layer (6a), second hole-transporting layer (6b), light-emitting layer (5), first electron-transporting layer (7a), second electron-transporting layer (7b), and cathode (4) (Fig. 2 of Takahashi et al.; [0249]). Takahashi et al. discloses compounds of the following form:
PNG
media_image2.png
258
330
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 2 of Takahashi et al.) where X = O or S, Ar1 = aryl or heteroaryl, and Ar2 = heteroaryl, L1-2 = independently arylene having 6-30 ring carbon atoms such as phenylene, biphenylene, terphenylene, and naphthylene ([0026], [0046]). Narrowed forms include the following:
PNG
media_image3.png
436
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 11 of Takahashi et al.). An embodiment is disclosed:
PNG
media_image4.png
156
204
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(page 162 of Takahashi et al.) such that o = p = 0, n = 0, L2 = unsubstituted arylene group of 6 ring-forming carbon atoms (phenylene), X = O, Ar1 = unsubstituted aryl group of 6 ring-forming carbon atoms (phenyl), and FG = Applicant’s Formula 5 (with m5 = 0) of Applicant’s Formulae 1 and 1-4 as comprising (any one of) the hole-transporting layer(s) ([0243]). However, Takahashi et al. does not explicitly disclose an embodiment that fully reads on the Applicant’s formula, particularly in regards to the nature of the L1 group. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify the compound as disclosed by Takahashi et al. (above) such that L1 = unsubstituted arylene group of 12 ring-forming carbon atoms (biphenylene). The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves an exchange of one group (phenylene) for a functional equivalent (another arylene, i.e., biphenylene) selected from a highly finite list as disclosed by Takahashi et al. as viable embodiments for the L1 group; further motivation exists, as the modification merely involves a homologous extension of the phenylene (to biphenylene), thus producing a compound that can be expected to have highly similar chemical and physical properties (and easily envisioned from the scope of Takahashi et al.’s formula), thus rendering the production predictable with a reasonable expectation of success. Takahashi et al. further discloses compounds such as the following as host material comprising the light-emitting layer:
PNG
media_image5.png
70
160
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(page 209 of Takahashi et al.) such that c = d = 1, R39-40 = unsubstituted aryl group of 6 ring-forming carbon atoms (phenyl), and R31-38 = hydrogen of Applicant’s Formula E-1.
Regarding Claim 10, Takahashi et al. discloses another narrowed formula:
PNG
media_image6.png
354
422
media_image6.png
Greyscale
(page 12 of Takahashi et al.) where Y = NR (with R = aryl group having 6-30 ring carbon atoms such as phenyl and naphthyl) ([0032], [0042]). Another embodiment is disclosed:
PNG
media_image1.png
182
196
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 169 of Takahashi et al.). However, Takahashi et al. does not explicitly disclose an embodiment that corresponds to any of the explicated recited compounds in the claim. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify the compound as disclosed by Takahashi et al. (above) such that the resulting compound corresponds to Applicant’s A45. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves an exchange of one group (phenyl) for a functional equivalent (another aryl, i.e., naphthyl) selected from a highly finite list as disclosed by Takahashi et al. as possible viable embodiments for an aryl group (for R) (and easily envisioned from the scope of its general formula), thus rendering the production predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of WIPO publication WO 2020/111253 A1 (herein referred to as “Takahashi et al.”) as the English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
The closest prior art is provided by Takahashi et al. (WO 2020/111253 A1), which discloses inventive compounds encompassed by the following formula for use in an organic electroluminescent (EL) device:
PNG
media_image7.png
436
464
media_image7.png
Greyscale
(page 14 of Takahashi et al.) where R1-20 = hydrogen (including deuterium) or substituent group ([0017], [0026]). An embodiment is disclosed:
PNG
media_image4.png
156
204
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(page 162 of Takahashi et al.). However, it is the position of the Office that neither Takahashi et al. singly nor in further combination with any other prior art discloses any of the compounds as recited in the claims, particularly in regards to the nature of the substituents attached to the core dibenzofuran or dibenzothiophene group.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (pages 70-76) with respect to the deficiencies of the previously cited prior art have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1137. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6am-3pm.
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.
/JAY YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
