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 § 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2021/0083201).
Regarding Claims 1-4, Kim teaches a material represented by Compd 28 (page 15):
PNG
media_image1.png
218
398
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Comds 28 reads on applicant Formula 1 wherein Ra = phenyl; R2-R7 = H; p = 0, A = phenyl(biphenyl)amine; Rb = H (per claims 1-2).
Comds 28 reads on applicant Formula 2 and 8 wherein Ra1 = phenyl; R12-R17 = H; p = 0; a =0, Ar1 = phenyl; b = 1 L2 = phenylene, Ar2 = phenyl; Rb = H (per claims 3-4)
Regarding Claim 6, Kim teaches Compd 33 (page 16)
PNG
media_image2.png
298
398
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compd 33 is identical to B1-2 (per claim 6).
Regarding Claims 7-10, Kim teaches an OLED:
[0122] the first electrode of the organic light-emitting device may be an anode,
[0123] the second electrode of the organic light-emitting device may be a cathode,
[0124] the organic layer may include at least one heterocyclic compound represented by Formula 1 (Compds 28 and 33).
[0125] the organic layer may further include a hole transport region between the first electrode and the emission layer and an electron transport region between the emission layer and the second electrode,
[0126] the hole transport region may include a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an emission auxiliary layer, an electron blocking layer, or any combination thereof, and
[0127] the electron transport region may include a hole blocking layer, an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, or any combination thereof (per claim 10).
[0128] In one embodiment, the hole transport region may include the heterocyclic compound (Compds 28 and 33) (per claims 7-9) .
[0129] In one or more embodiments, the hole transport region includes a hole transport layer, which includes the heterocyclic compound.
[0130] In one or more embodiments, the emission layer may include the heterocyclic compound.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2021/0083201) in view of Park (US 2020/0403165).
Regarding Claim 5, Kim teaches Compd 28 used in an OLED (paragraph 117). Compd 28 can contain deuterium but the amount is not indicated.
Park teaches an OLED (abstract). Parks teaches that studies have been made to introduce a deuterium-substituted compound as a material in the light emitting layer in order to improve the longevity and stability of the organic light emitting diode (paragraph 9).
Compounds substituted with deuterium are known to exhibit differences in thermodynamic behavior from those bonded with hydrogen because the atomic mass of deuterium is twice as great as that of hydrogen, which results in lower zero point energy and lower vibration energy level (paragraph 10).
Physicochemical properties involving deuterium, such as chemical bond lengths, etc., appear to be different from those involving hydrogen for hydrogen. In particular, the van der Waals radius of deuterium is smaller than that of hydrogen, because of the smaller stretching amplitude of the C-D bond compared to the C—H bond. Generally, the C-D bond is shorter and stronger than the C—H bond. Upon deuterium substitution, the ground state energy is lowered and a short bond length is formed between the carbon atom and the deuterium atom. Accordingly, the molecular hardcore volume becomes smaller, thereby reducing the electron polarizability can be reduced, and the thin film volume can be increased by weakening the intermolecular interaction (paragraph 11).
Deuterium substitution provides the effect of reducing the crystallinity of the thin film, that is, it makes the thin film amorphous. Generally, a compound having deuterium substitution may be advantageously used to increase the life span and driving characteristics of an OLED and further improve the thermal resistance ( paragraph 12).
The office regards that above teaching as a positive recitation showing the clear advantages of substituting at least one hydrogen atom(s) with deuterium atoms in an OLED compound. The expectation of one or ordinary skill in the art is to achieve a device with a low-voltage driving and long life span.
Therefore, with the expectation of achieve said low-voltage driving and long life span in the device, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of invention to have incorporated deuterium in Compd 28 at a sufficient level to optimize low-voltage driving and long life span which would have overlapped a portion of the claimed range, absent unexpected results (per claim 5).
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