DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is responsive to the amendment received June 15, 2026. Claims 1-11 were amended. Claims 1-12 are pending. The amendment to the specification is acknowledged.
Amendment of the title of the invention is acknowledged.
The rejection of claims 1-12 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or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention is withdrawn due to the June 15, 2026 amendment.
The rejection of claims 1-5 and 7-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mun et al. (US 10,840,455 B1) is withdrawn due to the June 15, 2026 amendment.
The rejection of claims 1-12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun et al. (US 10,840,455 B1) is withdrawn due to the June 15, 2026 amendment.
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2022/0238811 A1; listed on 2/16/2023 I.D.S.).
Park et al. teaches compounds for a light emitting device according to formula 1, which may more specifically be according to formula 2 (see par. 60 and 89):
PNG
media_image1.png
152
356
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
160
340
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding compound claims 1-4, in formula 2, R3 and R4 may be alkyl, aryl, or heterocyclic per instant R1 and R2 (see par. 69), neighboring R1s or R2s may form an aromatic ring group (see par. 67-68) per the recited benzofluorene core group and a R1 or R2 may individually be alkyl, aryl, or heterocyclic per an instant Ar1 group, Ar1 and Ar2 may be selected as aryl, fluorenyl, or heterocyclic per instant Ar2 and Ar3 (see par. 75-78), and L1 to L3 are single bond, arylene, or heterocyclic group (see par. 81). Regarding claim 5, further substitution upon the ring formed by multiple R1s or R2s joining together is not required. Regarding claim 6 and at least instant compound #161 reproduced immediately below, Park et al. Formula 2 variables R3 and R4 may each be selected as alkyl (methyl), R1s may join to form a ring, R2 may be aryl (phenyl), each Ar1 and Ar2 may be aryl (phenyl) (see par. 60-91):
PNG
media_image3.png
132
114
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Instant compound #161.
With respect to device claims 7-12, Park et al. teaches device structures using formula 1 compounds (see claim 1, page 69 and abstract). With further respect to claims 8 to 11, the claims do not specifically require specific other layers be present and the claims only require an organic layer between electrodes containing the compound of formula 1. A layered structure described in the abstract containing a formula 1 in an organic layer between electrodes is considered to meet the structural requirements of claims 8 to 11. With respect to claim 12, multiple functional layers are present in the layered devices other than the organic layer containing a formula 1 compound (see par. 3, Figure 1, Figure 2, par. 34-43). It is not seen where Park et al. exemplifies a compound of Formulas 1 or 2 where a substituent per instant Ar2 was selected for the example compound; however, 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 have formed Park et al. formula 2 compounds as defined and devices including the compounds as described above wherein the resultant compound and devices would also meet the limitations of the instant claims. One would expect to achieve functional compounds for operational devices within the disclosure of Park et al. with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights