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 August 7, 2026. Claim 1 was amended. Claims 1-13 are pending.
The rejection of claims 1-3, 5-8, and 10-13 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2018/0083197 A1) is withdrawn due to the amendment of independent claim 1 in the claim set received August 7, 2026.
The declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 filed August 7, 2026 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-13 based upon Park et al. (US 2018/0083197) as set forth in the last Office action because: While additional compounds have been tested, the comparative compounds are not commensurate in scope with breadth of compounds taught within Park et al. and the “inventive” examples are not commensurate in scope with the multitude of compounds within the independent claim 1 formula and/or dependent claim 9 reciting 1016 specific compounds.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0083197 A1; cited on 04/28/2023 I.D.S.).
Regarding claim 1, Park et al. teaches compounds for an organic light emitting device according to formulas 2 and 3 (par. 79):
PNG
media_image1.png
232
284
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
L1 is aryl per instant L1 (see par. 69). Ar1 and Ar2 may be selected as C6-C60 aryl group (par. 75-76) per instant groups R12 and R11. R2 may be selected as aryl or heteroaryl (see par. 67-68) per instant Ar. The formula 2 corresponds to instant 1-1 of claim 2 and formula 3 corresponds to instant 1-2 of claim 2. Regarding claims 3 and 4, the R2 may bond at any position of the ring into which it is drawn, which corresponds to instant no. 1 or 4 position, and L1 linking bond may be at the other of a position corresponding to instant no. 1 or 4. With further respect to claim 4, Ar1 and Ar2 may be selected as at least phenyl or biphenyl (see par. 75-77). With respect to claim 5, the formula 2 and 3 comprise oxygen per instant formula 2-1. Regarding claim 6, R2 may be selected as aryl or heteroaryl (see par. 67-68) per instant Ar. Regarding claim 7, Ar1 and Ar2 may be selected as C6-C60 aryl group (par. 75-76) per instant groups R12 and R11. Regarding claim 8, no deuterium is required to be present on the taught compounds per recited 0%, but also note that substitution by deuterium is taught as an option (see par. 68, 71, 74, and 84). Regarding claim 9, per at least instant compound #611, Park et al. formula 2 is the same when R2 is phenyl aryl (par. 67-68) and Ar1 and Ar2 are each selected as biphenyl aryl (see par. 75-76) and bonding of the R2 is the same as shown in instant #611 and bonding of the benzonaphthofuran is the same as shown and L1 is phenyl:
PNG
media_image2.png
152
136
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[Instant compound #611 of instant claim 9]
Regarding claims 10-13, the compounds are used in a layer of a device between electrodes (see claims 5 and 6 on page 58). The device claims do not require any other layers specifically be present other than a layer with the compound. A device structure comprising Park et al. formula 2 or 3 in a layer meets the structural requirements recited in claims 10-13.
While Park et al. does not exemplify all compounds that would meet the instant formula 1 definition for use in a device layer, given the teaching of the reference with respect to Park et al. formulas 2 and 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have formed compounds as defined for use in a device structure as described above, wherein the resultant compound and device would also meet the limitations of the instant claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 7, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As noted above, the declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 filed August 7, 2026 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-13 based upon Park et al. (US 2018/0083197) as set forth in the last Office action because: While additional compounds have been tested, the comparative compounds are not commensurate in scope with breadth of compounds taught within Park et al. and the “inventive” examples are not commensurate in scope with the multitude of compounds within the independent claim 1 formula and/or dependent claim 9 reciting 1016 specific compounds. The examples relied on by applicant as evidence of unexpected results do not provide an adequate basis to support a conclusion that other embodiments falling within the scope of the claims will behave in the same manner, and therefore, the evidence is not persuasive of nonobviousness because it is not commensurate in scope with the claims. (See In re Kao, 639 F.3d 1057, 1068 (Fed. Cir. 2011).)
The anticipation rejection over Park has been withdrawn. Applicant argues features specific to example embodiments of Park. With respect to an obviousness rejection over Park, the office notes that a reference’s teaching is not limited to only preferred or example embodiment. A reference is relevant for all it contains. Applicant argues Park “encompass a broad and diverse range of compound structures”, but the office submits applicant continues to recite a broad groups of structures also.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2010/0001636 teaches dibenzofuran amine derivatives considered relevant to the field of endeavor.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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
