CTNF 18/041,858 CTNF 101147 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 1. 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 2. 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 3. 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA 4. Claim s 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Ham et al. (KR 20200062616 A, English machine translation obtained from Global Dossier) . 5. Regarding claim 1 , Ham discloses the following tertiary amine compound (Compound 1 (Ham), ¶ [0106], see below) for a capping layer of an organic electroluminescent device that reads on Formula 1 wherein: PNG media_image1.png 502 734 media_image1.png Greyscale X 1 -X 3 are each independently C-H; and R 1 is a hydrogen atom and k is equal to two; and L 1 is a phenylene and r is equal to one; and L 2 and L 3 are both phenylenes, and m and n are both equal to one; and Ar 2 and Ar 3 are both dibenzofuran substituents; and p and q are both equal to zero. 6. Regarding claim 2 , Ham discloses the following tertiary amine compound (Compound 1 (Ham), ¶ [0106], see above) that is identical to the compound of Formula 2-105 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 7. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 8. 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. 07-23-aia AIA 9. 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 10. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA 11. Claim s 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ham et al. (KR 20200062616 A, English translation obtained from Global Dossier) . 12. Regarding claims 3 and 4 , Ham discloses the following tertiary amine compound (Compound 1 (Ham), ¶ [0106], see below) for a capping layer of an organic PNG media_image1.png 502 734 media_image1.png Greyscale electroluminescent device that reads on Formula 1 as per claim 1 (see above, regarding claim 1) and Formula 2-105 as per claim 2 (see above, regarding claim 2). 13. Ham teaches organic electroluminescent devices with improved color purity, external light emitting efficiency, and device lifespan when tertiary amine compounds, such as Compound 1 (Ham), are used in the capping layer (¶ [0163]). 14. Ham teaches an organic electroluminescent device comprising (¶ [0157], [0160], and see ¶ [0242]-[0243] for Example 11): a first electrode; and an organic layer comprising a plurality of layers arranged on the first electrode; and a second electrode arranged on the organic layer; and a capping layer arranged on the second electrode wherein the capping layer comprises a tertiary amine compound. 15. While Ham does not specifically teach Compound 1 (Ham) in a capping layer of an organic electroluminescent device, Ham does generally teach the use of tertiary amine compounds in the capping layer of organic electroluminescent devices of claims 3 and 4. 16. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the organic electroluminescent devices of Ham by using Compound 1 (Ham) in the capping layer, based on the teaching of Ham. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results and one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the modified organic electroluminescent devices to possess the benefits taught by Ham (improved color purity, external light emitting efficiency, and device lifespan (¶ [0163])). See MPEP 2143(I)(A). 17. The modified organic electroluminescent device of Ham comprising Compound 1 (Ham) in the capping layer reads on all the limitations of claims 3 and 4 . Conclusion 07-96 AIA 18. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tang et al. (CN 109824659 A, English machine translation obtained from WIPO) discloses tertiary amine compounds for a capping layer of an organic electroluminescent device related to Formula 1 . 19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brandon J. Cooper whose telephone number is (571)272-0005. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. 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. /B.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1786 /JENNIFER A BOYD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/041,858 Page 2 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/041,858 Page 3 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/041,858 Page 4 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/041,858 Page 5 Art Unit: 1786 Application/Control Number: 18/041,858 Page 6 Art Unit: 1786