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 under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2021-0184859, filed on 12/22/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2022 was filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 10/24/2022. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The letters, numbers, and/or bonds in the chemical structures given in paragraphs [00105], [00135], [00204], and [00215] are low-resolution/illegible. Please correct these structures so all letters, numbers, and/or bonds are clearly visible. See the example below.
PNG
media_image1.png
428
596
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Please note that this example is non-limiting and there may be other structures that require correction. Please check all formulae to make sure they are clear. Applicant may wish to make these structures clearer by increasing the size of the structure and/or font, making the font bold, and/or making the lines thicker.
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 1-25 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.
With respect to independent claims 1 and 15, the claims state that “any hydrogen atom in the molecule is substituted with a deuterium atom”.
This is confusing because the only previous molecule in the claim is referred to as an “amine compound”, and it is not clear whether this is the molecule Applicant is referring to or whether there is another molecule, which is not the amine molecule.
In continuing examination, Examiner is interpreting “molecule” as referring to the “amine molecule” represented by Formula 1.
Claims 2-14 and 16-25 are rejected by virtue of dependency.
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.
Claims 15 and 20-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mujica-Fernaud et al. (US 2015/0155491 A1).
With respect to claim 15, Mujica-Fernaud discloses compound (160) (page 24), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
422
328
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compound 160 meets the requirements of the instant claim when n is 0 and R is not present, Ar1 is represented by Formula 4, and Ar2 is represented by Formula 5. In Formula 4, m2 is 1, n5 is 0 and R5 is not present, X is oxygen and n6 is 0 so that R6 is not present. In Formula 5, m3 is 1 and n7 is 0 so that R7 is not present, R9 is a hydrogen atom, n8 is 0 and R8 is not present, and Ar3 is an unsubstituted phenyl group.
With respect to claim 20, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 15, and Formula 4 is represented by instant Formula 4-2, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 21, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 20, and Formula 4-2 is represented by Formula 4-b, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 22, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 15, and Formula 5 is represented by Formula 5-3, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 23, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 22, and Formula 5-3 is represented by Formula 5-d, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 24, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 15, and R is not present, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 25, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 15, and the compound is identical to instant D85.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8-14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujica-Fernaud et al. (US 2015/0155491 A1) as applied above.
With respect to claim 1, Mujica-Fernaud teaches a light emitting element comprising a first electrode (an anode), a second electrode (a cathode), and at least one functional layer between the electrodes which comprises an amine compound of formula (1) (paragraph 0085), such as compound (160) (page 24), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
422
328
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compound 160 meets the requirements of the instant claim when n is 0 and R is not present, Ar1 is represented by Formula 4, and Ar2 is represented by Formula 5. In Formula 4, m2 is 1, n5 is 0 and R5 is not present, X is oxygen and n6 is 0 so that R6 is not present. In Formula 5, m3 is 1 and n7 is 0 so that R7 is not present, R9 is a hydrogen atom, n8 is 0 and R8 is not present, and Ar3 is an unsubstituted phenyl group.
Mujica-Fernaud teaches that the use of compounds of the invention in electronic devices result in high efficiencies, low operating voltage, and long lifetime (paragraph 0133).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use compound (160) in the functional layer of a light emitting element in order to achieve an electronic device with high efficiency, low operating voltage, and long lifetime, as taught by Mujica-Fernaud.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and Mujica-Fernaud also teaches that the functional layer comprises at least a hole injection layer, a hole transporting layer, an emission layer, and an electron transporting layer between the two electrodes (paragraph 0165), and the hole transport layer comprises the compound (paragraph 0131).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound in a hole transporting layer, as taught by Mujica-Fernaud.
With respect to claim 4, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, as discussed above.
Compound (160) is derived from Mujica-Fernaud formula (1) which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image3.png
316
422
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mujica-Fernaud also teaches that Ar1 is represented by formula (28) (paragraph 0055 and page 7), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image4.png
352
362
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This structure meets the requirements of instant formula 2-2 when n1 and n2 are 0 and R1a and R2 are not present.
Mujica-Fernaud includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Mujica-Fernaud being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound for use in an electronic device which results in high efficiencies, low operating voltage, and long lifetime (paragraph 0133), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 5, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 4, and Formula 2-2 is represented by Formula 2-c, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 6, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, as discussed above.
Compound (160) is derived from Mujica-Fernaud formula (1) which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image3.png
316
422
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mujica-Fernaud also teaches that Ar1 is represented by formula (28) (paragraph 0055 and page 7), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image4.png
352
362
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This structure meets the requirements of instant formula 2-2 when n1 and n2 are 0 and R1a and R2 are not present.
Mujica-Fernaud includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Mujica-Fernaud being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound for use in an electronic device which results in high efficiencies, low operating voltage, and long lifetime (paragraph 0133), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 8, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and Formula 4 is represented by Formula 4-2, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 9, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 8, and Formula 4-2 is represented by Formula 4-b, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 10, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and Formula 5 above is represented by Formula 5-3, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 11, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 10, and Formula 5-3 is represented by Formula 5-d, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 12, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and R is not present, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 13, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 2, as discussed above.
Mujica-Fernaud also teaches an embodiment of the invention in Table 1 (page 76) wherein host compound H1 is used in the emission layer (EML). Compound H1 is pictured below to facilitate discussion.
PNG
media_image5.png
252
514
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Formula E-1 when d11 is 2 and the two R40 are joined to form a ring, and all other R groups are hydrogen atoms.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a compound of Formula E-1 as a host material in the emission layer, as demonstrated by Mujica-Fernaud.
With respect to claim 14, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and the amine compound is identical to instant D85.
With respect to claim 16, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 15, as discussed above.
Compound (160) is derived from Mujica-Fernaud formula (1) which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image3.png
316
422
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mujica-Fernaud also teaches that Ar1 is represented by formula (28) (paragraph 0055 and page 7), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image4.png
352
362
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This structure meets the requirements of instant formula 2-2 when n1 and n2 are 0 and R1a and R2 are not present.
Mujica-Fernaud includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Mujica-Fernaud being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound for use in an electronic device which results in high efficiencies, low operating voltage, and long lifetime (paragraph 0133), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 17, Mujica-Fernaud teaches the compound of claim 16, and Formula 2-2 is represented by Formula 2-c, as pictured above.
Claims 1-7, 12, 14-19, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2021/0359223 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Kim discloses an organic light emitting element (paragraph 0076), comprising a first electrode (a positive electrode, paragraph 0094), a second electrode (a negative electrode, paragraph 0095), and at least one functional layer (an electron blocking layer) comprises a compound of Formula 2 (paragraph 0089), such as the compound below (page 51).
PNG
media_image6.png
235
311
media_image6.png
Greyscale
This compound is derived from Kim formula 2, which is pictured below (paragraph 0012).
PNG
media_image7.png
180
250
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that each of Ar2 through Ar4 may be selected from -L2-Z (paragraph 0014), wherein L2 is a direct bond or a phenylene group (paragraph 0015).
When the direct bond between the amine and the naphthyl group is replaced by a phenylene group, it forms a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when n is 0 and R is not present, Ar1 is represented by Formula 2, and Ar2 is represented by Formula 3. In Formula 2, n1 is 0 and R1 is not present, n2 is 0 and R2 is not present. In Formula 3, m1 is 1, and n3 is 0 so that R3 is not present, and n4 is 0 so that R4 is not present.
Kim includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kim being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which results in an organic light emitting device with improved low driving voltage, high efficiency, and service life (paragraph 00170), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
Kim teaches that organic light emitting devices comprising compounds of the invention can improve low driving voltage, high efficiency, and service life (paragraph 0017).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound of Kim in the electron blocking layer of a device with the claimed structure in order to obtain an organic light emitting device with improved low driving voltage, high efficiency, and service life, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, Kim teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and the device comprises at least one electron blocking layer comprising the compound, as discussed above.
With respect to claims 4 and 5, Kim teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and Formula 2 is represented by Formula 2-2, and either of Formulae 2-c or 2-d, because Kim is not limiting with regard to the bonding pattern of -L2-Z.
With respect to claim 6, Kim teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and Formula 3 is represented by instant Formula 3-2, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 7, Kim teaches the light emitting element of claim 6, and Formula 3-2 above is represented by instant Formula 3-e, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 12, Kim teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and R is not present, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 14, Kim teaches the light emitting element of claim 1, and the compound is identical to instant compound A65.
With respect to claim 15, Kim discloses the compound below (page 51).
PNG
media_image6.png
235
311
media_image6.png
Greyscale
This compound is derived from Kim formula 2, which is pictured below (paragraph 0012).
PNG
media_image7.png
180
250
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that each of Ar2 through Ar4 may be selected from -L2-Z (paragraph 0014), wherein L2 is a direct bond or a phenylene group (paragraph 0015).
When the direct bond between the amine and the naphthyl group is replaced by a phenylene group, it forms a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when n is 0 and R is not present, Ar1 is represented by Formula 2, and Ar2 is represented by Formula 3. In Formula 2, n1 is 0 and R1 is not present, n2 is 0 and R2 is not present. In Formula 3, m1 is 1, and n3 is 0 so that R3 is not present, and n4 is 0 so that R4 is not present.
Kim includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kim being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which results in an organic light emitting device with improved low driving voltage, high efficiency, and service life (paragraph 00170), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 16, Kim teaches the compound of claim 15, and Formula 2 could be represented by Formula 2-1 or 2-2, as Kim is not limiting with respect to the bonding pattern of -L2-Z.
With respect to claim 17, Kim teaches the compound of claim 16, and the teachings of Kim can be used to arrive at any of formulae 2-a through 2-d, as Kim is not limiting with respect to the bonding pattern of -L2-Z, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 18, Kim teaches the compound of claim 15, and Formula 3 above is represented by Formula 3-2, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 19, Kim teaches the compound of claim 18, and Formula 3-2 is represented by Formula 3-e, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 24, No teaches the compound of claim 15, and R is not present, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 25, No teaches the compound of claim 15, and one embodiment of the compound is identical to instant Compound A65.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
No et al. (KR 2014/0043224 A) – teaches relevant compounds
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M..
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.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Examiner, Art Unit 1786