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 .
Response to Amendment
In the response filed 06/25/2026, the claims were amended.
These amendments are hereby entered.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 of claims 1-3 and 5-8 as being anticipated by Song et al. (KR 2020/0049197 A), and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 4, 9, and 10 as being unpatentable over Song as applied above, claims 11-17 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2015/0336937 A1), claims 18 and 19 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied above and further in view of Song et al. (KR 2020/0049197 A), claims 20-24, 26-27, and 29-31 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (KR 2018/0010165 A), and claims 25 and 28 as being unpatentable over Jung as applied above, and further in view of Seo et al. (WO 2019/229583 A1), are withdrawn by the Office.
Claims 1-31 were originally filed.
Claim 32 has been added.
Claims 3-4, 11-19, 22-23, and 30 are canceled.
Claims 1, 2, 20, 21, 25-27, and 29 are instantly amended.
Claims 1-2, 5-10, 20-21, 24-29, and 31-32 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
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.
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 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (KR 2020/0049197 A, using the previously provided translation for references) and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2017/0141331 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Song teaches Compound P-132, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
374
288
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Compound P-132 is derived from Formula 1 (page 12 of the untranslated document), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
266
526
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Song also teaches that neighboring groups of R5 can combine with each other to form a ring (paragraph 0058).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when X1 is a carbon atom bonded to an unsubstituted aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), X2 is a nitrogen atom, X3 is carbon atom with a bond to General Formula (r1), and X4 is a nitrogen atom, Ar1 is represented by instant t2-1 and R6-R11 are hydrogen atoms, Q is oxygen and Z is a sulfur atom, R31 is a bond to X3, R37 is a phenyl-substituted heteroaryl having 16 carbon atoms forming a skeleton, and R32 through R36 and R38 are hydrogen atoms.
Song includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Song being a lack of the aforementioned additional fused ring 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 or substituent combination, such as forming a fused ring, from the finite list of possible substituents to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound capable of lowering the driving voltage of a device and improving the luminous efficiency and lifespan of the device (paragraph 0008), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
However, Song does not fairly suggest that two R5 in Formula 1 should be joined to form a fused naphthalene group.
In analogous art, Kim teaches an analogous compound which requires the inclusion of a fused naphthalene group at a position analogous to instant Ar1.
Kim teaches that when the ring including at least one nitrogen (pyrimidine) is combined with the substituted or unsubstituted-fused ring (naphthalene), the compound demonstrates advantageous balance between holes and electrons which increases the efficiency of an organic optoelectronic device including the compound.
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 incorporate a fused ring structure at a position analogous to instant Ar1 in order to achieve balance between holes and electrons, which increases the efficiency of an organic optoelectronic device including the compound, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claim 2, Song and Kim teach the compound of claim 1, and the compound is also represented by General Formula (G2) because X3 is bonded to General Formula (r2) at the asterisk, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 5, Song and Kim teach the compound of claim 1, and X2 is a nitrogen atom, X3 is a carbon with a bond to General Formula (r1), and X4 is a nitrogen atom, as discussed above.
With respect to claims 6 through 8, Song and Kim teach the compound of claim 1 and Song also teaches manufacture of an organic electroluminescent device (paragraph 0158, claim 7) on a glass substrate (paragraph 160, claim 8) using one of the inventive compounds as a host in a thin film (light-emitting layer, paragraph 0169, claim 6), such as Example 15 (Table 2, page 31 of the untranslated document), which comprises compound 1-132 (P-132), which is pictured and discussed above.
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 include the compound in a thin film in a light-emitting device with the claimed device structure, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claims 9 and 10, Song and Kim teach the light-emitting apparatus of claim 8, as discussed above.
Song also teaches an electronic device comprising the apparatus, such as a display device, and a communication unit that controls the device, wherein the display device may be a lighting device, such as a game console, which has an implied housing around the console (paragraph 0041).
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 light-emitting apparatus of Song and Kim in an electronic device with a communication unit or in a lighting device encased in a housing, as taught by Song.
Claims 20-21, 24-28, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (KR 2018/0010165 A, using the provided translation for references) and further in view of Seo et al (WO 2019/229583 A1, using US 2021/0363151 A1 as an official translation and for references).
With respect to claim 20, Jung teaches the compound below (page 10 of the untranslated document).
PNG
media_image3.png
310
344
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Jung does not teach nor fairly suggest a substituent attached to the ring analogous to instant Ar1.
In analogous art, Seo teaches benzofuropyrimidine derivative which is bonded to an aromatic hydrocarbon chain according to General Formula (G1), which is pictured below (abstract).
PNG
media_image4.png
188
504
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In this formula, each of Ar1-Ar4 is an aromatic hydrocarbon ring and each of m and n are 0 or 1 (abstract).
Seo teaches that when a plurality of aromatic hydrocarbon rings are bonded, the organic compound used in a light-emitting element can have improved reliability compared to compounds comprising only one aromatic ring (paragraph 0099).
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 plurality of hydrocarbon rings on the compound of Jung at a position analogous to instant Ar1 in order to obtain improved reliability compared to compounds with one aromatic ring, as taught by Seo.
Such a modification produces a compound which meets the requirements of instant General Formula (G4) when X1 is a carbon atom bonded to (r3), X2 is a nitrogen atom, X3 is a carbon atom substituted with a C6 aryl group, and X4 is a nitrogen atom, Ar1 is a substituted aromatic hydrocarbon ring having 6 carbon atoms (benzene) and the substituent is a substituted aryl group having 6 carbon atoms (biphenyl), Q and Z are both an oxygen atom, R37 is a bond to R42 and R35, R36, and R38 are hydrogen atoms, n is 0 and α is not present, R49 is a phenyl group, and R41 and R43 through R48 are hydrogen atoms.
With respect to claim 21, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 20, and General Formula (G4) is represented by General Formula (G5), for the reasons discussed above.
With respect to claim 24, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 20, and X2 is a nitrogen atom, X3 is a carbon atom, and X4 is a nitrogen atom, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 25, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 20, as discussed above.
Jung also teaches that a position analogous to instant X3 is unsubstituted (paragraph 0015).
Such a modification produces instant compound (100).
Jung includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Jung being a lack of the aforementioned hydrogen atom 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 can improve efficiency, low driving voltage, and/or lifespan characteristics of an organic light-emitting device comprising the compound (paragraph0023), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 26, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 21, and General Formula (G5) is represented by General Formula (G6), for the reasons discussed above.
With respect to claim 27, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 26, and the compound of General Formula (G6) is also represented by General Formula (G7) for the reasons discussed above.
With respect to claim 28, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 27, as discussed above, and the compound meets the requirements of the instant claim when k is 0, all R characters are hydrogen atoms, and all other variables are as discussed above.
With respect to claim 32, Jung and Seo teach the compound of claim 20, and the substituent of Ar1 is biphenyl, as discussed above.
Claims 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (KR 2018/0010165 A, using the provided translation for references) and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2017/0141331 A1).
With respect to claim 29, Jung teaches the compound below (page 10 of the untranslated document).
PNG
media_image3.png
310
344
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Jung does not teach nor fairly suggest a fused group of instant General Formula (t2-1), (t2-2), (t3-1), (t3-2), (t3-3), or (t4).
In analogous art, Kim teaches an analogous compound which requires the inclusion of a fused naphthalene group at a position analogous to instant Ar1.
Kim teaches that when the ring including at least one nitrogen (pyrimidine) is combined with the substituted or unsubstituted-fused ring (naphthalene), the compound demonstrates advantageous balance between holes and electrons which increases the efficiency of an organic optoelectronic device including the compound.
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 incorporate a fused ring structure at a position analogous to instant Ar1 in order to achieve balance between holes and electrons, which increases the efficiency of an organic optoelectronic device including the compound, as taught by Kim.
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when X1 is carbon atom with a bond to General Formula (r3), X2 is a nitrogen atom, X3 is a substituted carbon atom and the substituent is a C6 aryl (phenyl), and X4 is a nitrogen atom, Ar1 is represented by instant t2-1 and R6-R11 are hydrogen atoms, Q and Z are both an oxygen atom, R37 is a bond to R42, R32 through R36, R38, and R41 through R48 are hydrogen atoms, and R49 is a C6 phenyl group.
With respect to claim 31, Jung and Kim teach the compound of claim 29, and X2 is a nitrogen atom, X3 is a carbon atom, and X4 is a nitrogen atom, as discussed above.
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 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/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights