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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment of 03/17/2026 has been entered.
Disposition of claims:
Claims 1–15 are pending.
Claims 1, 6, 10–13 have been amended.
The amendment of claim 6 has overcome the rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite set forth in the last Office Action. The rejection has been withdrawn.
The amendment of claim 1 and 13 have overcome the rejections of claims 1–15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hatakeyama et al. (US 2018/0301629 A1, hereafter “Hatakeyama”) set forth in the last Office Action. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the cited reference must describe each and every element of the claims in order to anticipate them under Section 102(a)(1). The examiner asserts that the rejections of claims 1–15 relying on Hatakeyama as set forth in the last Office Action address each and every limitation of the claims and therefore anticipate them under 102(a)(1). For at least this reason, the Applicant’s argument is not found to be persuasive.
Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the rejections relying on Hatakeyama as set forth in the last Office Action. However, Hatakeyama teaches embodiments which read upon Applicant’s newly amended claims.
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.
(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.
Claims 1–6, 8–10, 12–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hatakeyama et al. (US 2018/0301629 A1, hereafter “Hatakeyama”).
Regarding Claims 1 and 13, Hatakeyama teaches an organic electroluminescent element comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a light emitting layer disposed between the electrodes [0009]. The light emitting layer comprises a polycyclic aromatic compound represented by general formula (1) and an anthracene-based compound represented by general formula (3) [0010].
Compound 1-1401 [pg. 19] and Compound 1-2667 [pg. 34], exemplified structures of Hatakeyama’s general formula (1), read on Applicant’s Formula 1 (shown below),
PNG
media_image1.png
281
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
201
240
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein:
X1 and X2 are each N,
Y, Y1a, Y4a, Y5a, Y9a, Y10a, Y1b, Y2b, Y3b, Y4b, Y5b, Y6b, Y7b, Y8b, Y9b, and Y10b are each C,
L1 and L2 are each a single bond, while L3 and L4 are each no bond,
Ar1 and Ar3 are each phenyl,
R is not present, R1– R5 are each hydrogen.
Compound 1-1401 meets Applicant’s condition (iii) wherein L3 represents no bond and L1 and L2 are each a single bond.
PNG
media_image1.png
281
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
393
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein:
X1 and X2 are each N,
Y, Y1a, Y4a, Y5a, Y9a, Y10a, Y1b, Y2b, Y3b, Y4b, Y5b, Y6b, Y7b, Y8b, Y9b, and Y10b are each C,
L2, L3, and L4 are each no bond, L1 is a linking atom boron (B),
Ar1 and Ar3 are each phenyl,
R is an aryl (phenyl), R1 is a diarylamine wherein R and R1 are linked together,
R2– R5 are each hydrogen.
Compound 1-2667 meets Applicant’s condition (iii) wherein L3 represents no bond and L1 is represented by a linking atom.
Note that Compound 1-2667 (shown above) has been flipped horizontally from how it was originally drawn in Hatakeyama, but the representation above is an identical molecule.
Regarding Claims 2 and 4, Compound 1-1401 reads on Applicant’s limitation since L1 and L2 are each a single bond.
Regarding Claims 3 and 5, Compound 1-2667 reads on Applicant’s limitation since L1 is a linking atom boron (B), which is represented by BR6 wherein R6 is an aryl (phenyl).
Regarding Claim 6, Compound 1-1401 reads on Applicant’s limitation since Ar1 and Ar3 are each represented by phenyl.
Regarding Claim 8, Compound 1-1401 reads on Applicant’s limitation since
PNG
media_image4.png
99
92
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is represented by
PNG
media_image5.png
79
109
media_image5.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding Claim 9, Compound 1-1401 reads on Applicant’s limitation since
PNG
media_image6.png
74
141
media_image6.png
Greyscale
is represented by
PNG
media_image7.png
61
84
media_image7.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding Claim 10, Compound 1-1401 is represented by the structure shown below.
PNG
media_image8.png
158
282
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
201
240
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12, Compound 1-1401 is represented by the structure shown below.
PNG
media_image9.png
114
220
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
201
240
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14–15, Hatakeyama teaches an organic electroluminescent element comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a light emitting layer disposed between the electrodes [0009]. The light emitting layer comprises a polycyclic aromatic compound represented by general formula (1) (such as Compound 1-1401 and Compound 2667) and an anthracene-based compound represented by general formula (3) [0010].
Per Claim 14, Hatakeyama teaches the light emitting layer comprises an anthracene-based material. Hatakeyama further teaches the anthracene-based compound functions as a host [0127].
Per Claim 15, Hatakeyama teaches a formulation of a polycyclic aromatic compound (such as Compound 1-1401 and Compound 2667) and an anthracene-based compound.
Claims 1–2, 4, 6, 8–10, 12–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xie et al. (CN 107501311 A, hereafter “Xie”). An English translation is provided within this Office Action.
Regarding Claims 1 and 13, Xie teaches Devices A–E comprising ITO/ NPB(30nm)/ TCTA(30nm)/ PPF:CZP2B-1(xwt%,30nm, x=1–20)/ PPF(10nm)/ TPBi(30nm)/ LiF(0.8nm)/ Al(150nm) wherein ITO is an anode, and Al is a cathode [0205]. The luminescent layer comprises Compound CZP2B-1 [0150] which reads on Applicant’s Formula 1 (shown below),
PNG
media_image1.png
281
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
264
349
media_image10.png
Greyscale
wherein:
X1 and X2 are each N,
Y, Y1a, Y4a, Y5a, Y9a, Y10a, Y1b, Y2b, Y3b, Y4b, Y5b, Y6b, Y7b, Y8b, Y9b, and Y10b are each C,
L2 and L3 are each a single bond, while L1 and L4 are each no bond,
Ar1 and Ar3 are each phenyl,
R is not present, R1– R5 are each hydrogen.
Compound CZP2B-1 meets Applicant’s condition (i) wherein L3 represents a single bond and L4 represents no bond.
Regarding Claims 2 and 4, Compound CZP2B-1 reads on Applicant’s limitation since L2 and L3 are each a single bond.
Regarding Claim 6, Compound CZP2B-1 reads on Applicant’s limitation since Ar1 and Ar3 each represent phenyl.
Regarding Claim 8, Compound CZP2B-1 reads on Applicant’s limitation since
PNG
media_image4.png
99
92
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is represented by
PNG
media_image5.png
79
109
media_image5.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding Claim 9, Compound CZP2B-1 reads on Applicant’s limitation since
PNG
media_image6.png
74
141
media_image6.png
Greyscale
is represented by
PNG
media_image7.png
61
84
media_image7.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding Claim 10, Compound CZP2B-1 is represented by the structure shown below.
PNG
media_image11.png
164
300
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
264
349
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12, Compound CZP2B-1 reads on the structure shown below.
PNG
media_image12.png
122
182
media_image12.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
264
349
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, the luminescent layer further comprises PPF as a host material [0205]. PPF comprises a dibenzofuran group (shown below).
PNG
media_image13.png
266
397
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15, Xie teaches a formulation of a PPF as a host material and Compound CZP2B-1 is a dopant in Devices A–E [0205].
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.
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.
Claims 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatakeyama et al. (US 2018/0301629 A1) as applied to claims 1–6, 8–10, 12–15 above, and further in view of Xu et al. (Chinese Chemical Letters, 2021, 32, 4, 1372-1376).
Regarding Claims 1, 7, and 11, Hatakeyama teaches Compound 1-2624 [pg. 28] wherein each nitrogen is bonded to a phenyl. Hatakeyama also teaches Compound 1-1401 wherein two benzenes are bonded together to form a carbazole.
PNG
media_image14.png
267
268
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
201
240
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Hatakeyama does not explicitly show a compound like Compound 1-2624 wherein the one of the benzenes attached to the nitrogen is bonded to one of the adjacent benzenes to form a carbazole.
Xu teaches the emission color and efficiency of MR-TADF molecules can be modulated by introducing additional aromatic rings into the MR backbone. Xu further teaches expanding the conjugation skeleton and increasing the molecular planarity reduced the singlet-triplet energy gap and increased the oscillator strength. Additionally, Xu teaches this aromatization of the skeleton not only extends the pi-conjugation but also increases the ICT localization area for a more efficient MR effect [pg. 1373]. This is exemplified by DABNA-1 and CzBN (shown below) wherein the benzenes connected to each nitrogen are bonded to an adjacent benzene ring.
PNG
media_image15.png
138
498
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Compound 1-2624 taught by Hatakeyama by bonding one of the benzene rings attached to a nitrogen to one of the adjacent benzene rings to form a carbazole, based on the teaching of Xu. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce the singlet-triplet energy gap and increase the oscillator strength, as taught by Xu.
Per Claim 1, the modified version of Compound 1-2624 (hereafter “Modified 1-2624”) reads on Applicant’s Formula 1 (shown below),
PNG
media_image1.png
281
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image16.png
345
404
media_image16.png
Greyscale
wherein:
X1 and X2 are each N,
Y, Y1a, Y4a, Y5a, Y9a, Y10a, Y1b, Y2b, Y3b, Y4b, Y5b, Y6b, Y7b, Y8b, Y9b, and Y10b are each C,
L2 is a single bond, while L1, L3, and L4 are each no bond,
Ar1 is a carbazole and Ar3 is a phenyl,
R is not present, R1– R5 are each hydrogen.
Modified 1-2624 meets Applicant’s condition (iii) wherein L3 represents no bond and L2 represents a single bond.
Per Claim 7, Modified 1-2624 reads on Applicant’s limitation since Ar1 represents carbazole.
Per Claim 11, Modified 1-2624 is represented by the structure shown below.
PNG
media_image17.png
159
280
media_image17.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image16.png
345
404
media_image16.png
Greyscale
wherein
PNG
media_image4.png
99
92
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is represented by
PNG
media_image18.png
156
105
media_image18.png
Greyscale
wherein U is NR8 and R8 is an aryl (phenyl).
PNG
media_image6.png
74
141
media_image6.png
Greyscale
is represented by
PNG
media_image7.png
61
84
media_image7.png
Greyscale
.
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 JAMES RICHARD FORTWENGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-5433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at (571) 270-7692. 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.
/J.R.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights