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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on
applications filed in China on October 21, 2020. It is noted, however, that the
foreign priority date is the effective filing date of the claimed invention if
a. The foreign application supports the claimed invention under 112(a), and
b. The applicant has perfected the right of priority by providing
i. A certified copy of the priority application, and
ii. A translation of the priority application (if not in English).
In the instant case, the applicant has submitted a certified copy of the priority application, but it is not in English, and the examiner cannot determine if it
supports the claimed invention. The effective filing date of the application is considered to be October 19, 2021, which is the actual filing date of PCT application PCT/CN2021/124790.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the figure labels are not in English. For example, the first figure should be labeled as "Fig. 1" followed by the . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: compounds are hard to discern. For example, compound 525 displays varying bond lengths that make
PNG
media_image1.png
117
250
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 defines the substituents of the linkers L, L1, and L2 of the nitrogen-containing compound of claim 3; however, claim 3 allows the linker to be selected from unsubstituted groups. Therefore, the confusion arises in claim 15 wherein:
(1) L, L1, and L2 may be selected from unsubstituted groups OR
(2) L, L1, and L2 may not be selected from unsubstituted groups.
Note that the examiner is choosing to interpret the claims as either (1) OR (2). The same confusion applies to claims 16 and 17 dependent off their respective parent claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (EP3715437A1, hereinafter "Lee").
Regarding claims 1-8, Lee discloses, in the relevant art of organic light-emitting devices, a compound of Formula 2 containing a nitrogen atom shown below (pg 4).
PNG
media_image2.png
777
1309
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lee discloses that CY2 and CY3 may each independently be a C5-C60 carbocyclic group and Ar1 and Ar2 may each independently be a C5-C60 carbocyclic group which is unsubstituted or substituted (pg 3-6, ¶ [0006]). Lee discloses preferred embodiments for compounds of Formula 2 including compound H1-27 shown below (pg 51).
PNG
media_image3.png
899
746
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Compound H1-27 is a compound of Lee’s Formula 2 wherein CY1 and CY2 are phenyl, R20 is diphenylamine, and Ar5 is phenyl. Compound H1-27 of Lee is also a compound of instant General Formula F-1 and F-2 and instant Chemical Formula 2 wherein:
Ar3 is phenyl;
R1, R3, and R4 is H;
R2 is F-2 wherein;
L, L1, and L2 are single bond;
Ar1 and Ar2 are phenyl;
N1 is 0.
Therefore, compound H1-27 of Lee reads on instant claims 1-8.
Regarding instant claim 9, compound H1-27 of Lee anticipates instant Compound 1 of claim 9 because the compounds are the same.
Regarding instant claim 15, the nitrogen-containing compound of claim 3 is defined to have substituents for L, L1, and L2 being selected from the group including but not limited to deuterium, halogen, cyano, and alkyl. However, claim 15 does not require that L, L1, and L2 are selected from a group containing a substituent. Therefore, compound H1-27 of Lee where L is a single bond anticipates the claim limitations of instant claim 15.
Regarding instant claim 16, the nitrogen-containing compound of claim 4 is defined to have substituents for L, L1, and L2 being selected from the group including but not limited to deuterium, fluorine, cyano, and methyl. However, claim 16 does not require that L, L1, and L2 are selected from a group containing a substituent. Therefore, compound H1-27 of Lee where L is a single bond anticipates the claim limitations of claim 16.
Regarding instant claim 17, the nitrogen-containing compound of claim 6 is defined to have substituents for Ar1 and Ar2 being selected from the group including but not limited to deuterium, halogen, cyano, and alkyl. However, claim 17 does not require that Ar1 and Ar2 are selected from a group containing a substituent. Therefore, compound H1-27 of Lee where Ar1 and Ar2 is an unsubstituted aryl with 6 carbons anticipates the claim limitations of claim 17.
Regarding instant claim 18, the nitrogen-containing compound of claim 7 is defined to have the substituent for Ar3 being selected from phenyl. However, claim 18 does not require that Ar3 be selected from a group containing a substituent. Therefore, compound H1-27 of Lee where Ar3 is an unsubstituted aryl with 6 carbon atoms anticipates the claim limitations of claim 18.
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, 11-14, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (EP3715437A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches the compound H1-27, which is a compound of instant claim 1 general formula F-1 and F-2 as described above.
Regarding claim 11, Lee further teaches that the compound may be used in an organic layer of an organic light-emitting device including a “a first electrode; a second electrode; and an organic layer disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode and including an emission layer, wherein the organic layer includes the composition” (¶ [0155]). Lee teaches specific devices containing a compound of the Formula 2 of Lee including devices Example 1-3 that contain the compound H1-14 (Table 1). Compound H1-14 is a compound of Formula 2 of Lee where CY3 is a C10 carbocyclic group and Ar5 is a single bond with R65 being an amino group substituted with biphenyls.
Lee further teaches that devices containing compound H1-14 display a high Max EQE efficiency, improved driving voltage, and a long lifetime (Table 1, ¶ [0232]). In addition, Lee teaches, more generally, compositions including the first compound, the second compound, and the third compound of Lee are suitable for use in an organic layer of an organic light-emitting device that may have a low driving voltage, high external quantum efficiency, and a long lifespan (¶ [0155]).
Lee is silent to a specific device that contains compound H1-27.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art of organic light-emitting devices before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute compound H1-27 in the organic light emitting device containing H1-14 of Lee. The motivation for doing so would have been to achieve a device with low driving voltage, high external quantum efficiency, and a long life-span as taught by Lee. Such a modified device would read on instant claims 11-12 and 14.
Regarding claim 13, Lee describes an embodiment where the emission layer may include a host and a dopant wherein the dopant may include the first compound and the host may include the second and third compound. Furthermore, Lee teaches the emission layer may include any dopant or host in addition to the composition described. Lee teaches the organic light-emitting device is a full-color organic light-emitting device where the emission layer may be patterned into a red emission layer, a green emission layer, and a blue emission layer (pg 67, ¶ [0184] -- [0193]).
Regarding instant claim 19, Lee teaches that when the hole transport region of the organic light-emitting device of Lee includes an electron blocking layer, the material for the electron blocking layer be any combination of the materials described above including a nitrogen containing compound of Formula 2 (¶ [0155] – [0211]).
Claims 1, 10, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (EP3715437A1) in view of Parham et al. (WO2014067614, hereinafter "Parham"). Note that a machine-generated translation of the document is provided with this office action.
Lee teaches compound H1-27 that reads on instant claim 1 above because it is a compound of instant General Formula F-1 and F-2 and instant Chemical Formula 2 wherein:
Ar3 is phenyl;
R1, R3, and R4 is H;
R2 is F-2 wherein;
L, L1, and L2 are single bond;
Ar1 and Ar2 are phenyl;
N1 is 0.
PNG
media_image4.png
817
1454
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Lee also teaches compound H1-28, which is a compound of instant Formula F-1 and F-2 where L2 is a phenyl linker. Therefore, phenylene is a known and acceptable moiety as taught by Lee for L2 of the instant Formula F-1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the single bond linker in the compound H1-27 of Lee with a phenyl linker. The motivation for doing so would have been to achieve a device with low driving voltage, high external quantum efficiency, and a long life-span as taught by Lee.
Although Lee teaches substitution corresponding to instant Ar2 in instant general Formula F-2 as being phenyl, Lee is silent on the substitution being dibenzofuran.
In the relevant art of organic light-emitting devices, Parham teaches compounds 9e, 9b, and 10f shown below (pg 89-92).
PNG
media_image5.png
1037
3308
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Compound 9e is a compound of instant general formula F1 and F2 where Ar3 is a phenyl-substituted aryl with 12 carbons, and R4 is substituted with F-2 where Ar1 and Ar2 are phenyl with L, L1, and L2 being phenyl linkers. Parham illustrates substitutions on the aryl amine group, corresponding to instant F-2, can be more than just phenyl with specific embodiments in compound 9b and 10f. Compound 9b demonstrates that dimethylfluorene is a known an acceptable substitution for nitrogen. Furthermore, compound 10f demonstrates that dibenzofuran is a known and acceptable substitution for nitrogen.
Parham teaches that devices containing specific embodiments of his Formula 1 display high external quantum efficiencies and long lifetimes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the phenyl substituted N in the Modified Compound of Lee with a dibenzofuran of Parham. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve external quantum efficiency and lifetime as taught by Parham.
Therefore, given the general formula and teachings of Parham and Lee, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the phenyl substituted N in the Modified Compound of Lee, because Parham teaches the variable may suitably be selected as dibenzofuran. The substitution would have been one preferred element for another and one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would reasonably expect the predictable result that the modified compound would be useful as a compound in the organic-light emitting device of Lee and possess the benefits taught by Parham. See MPEP 2143.I.(B).
The Modified Compound of Lee and Parham is shown below.
PNG
media_image6.png
800
832
media_image6.png
Greyscale
The Modified Compound of Lee and Parham reads on claim 10 because the compounds are the same.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Parham teaches that the aryl amine group represented by Formula A-2 may be attached directly to the carbazole or the aryl amine group may be attached to the carbazole via a linker Ar2 described by Formula A-1. Parham further teaches that Ar2 may be chosen from aryl or heteroaryl which are combined with one or more residues of R1 being selected from groups such as, but not limited to, H, D, F, and CN (Description, pg 2-3). For example, when Ar2 is selected from a deuterium-substituted phenyl, the modified compound would read on instant claims 15 and 16 wherein L is a substituted carbon arylene with deuterium. Note that instant claims 15 and 16 are being interpreted wherein L is not selected from unsubstituted groups.
Regarding claim 17, Parham teaches the aryl amine group attached to carbazole may be substituted with Ar1 as described by Formulas A-1 and A-2. Parham further teaches that Ar1 can be selected from aryl and heteroaryl groups which are combined with one or more residues of R1 being selected from groups such as, but not limited to, H, D, F, and CN (Description, pg 2-3). Note that the instant claim is interpreted wherein Ar1 and Ar2 are not selected from unsubstituted groups.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCAS Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Fridays 7:45 am to 12:00 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 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.
/JENNIFER A BOYD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1786
/L.Q.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1786