DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The office acknowledges the receipt of applicants’ response to the restriction requirement dated 05/07/2026.
Elected Species
PNG
media_image1.png
244
856
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A search of the prior art did not show the elected species. As no claims where specifically drawn to applicants’ elected species in independent form, no claims have been indicated as allowable. Claims written in independent form which require all the limitations of the elected species along with any dependent claims which require all the limitations of the elected species would be allowable. Under MPEP 803.02, the search was expanded to find an examinable species.
Examinable Species
The examinable species is represented by Compd 6467A
PNG
media_image2.png
242
485
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compd 6467A reads on claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16-20. Claims 6-7, 10 and 15 are withdrawn as not reading on the examinable species.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image3.png
162
658
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Due to the broad claiming in generic claim 1 by providing no structures for the compound, there is an issue with written description for claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16-20.
Written description requires a description of the claimed invention in sufficient detail so that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. While there are examples in the Specification, this does not support the full scope of claim 1. By having a claim written as such, there is an attempt to have a scope for a combination of generic material components that would extend beyond the material requirements supported in the Specification.
Per MPEP 2163(II)(A)(3)(a)(ii), the written description requirement for a claimed genera may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of species by (A) actual reduction to practice, (B) reduction to drawings, or (C) by disclosure of relevant, identifying characteristics, i.e., structure or other physical and/or chemical properties, by functional characteristics coupled with a known or disclosed correlation between function and structure, or by a combination of such identifying characteristics, sufficient to show the applicant was in possession of the claimed genus.
A "representative number of species" means that the species which are adequately described are representative of the entire genus. Thus, when there is substantial variation within the genus, one must describe a sufficient variety of species to reflect the variation within the genus. This raises issues with written description with claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16-20.
The office will treat the examinable species
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 1-5, 8-9, 11-14, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 2019/0214584 A1).
Regarding Claim 1-5, 8-9, Chen teaches a material represented by generic Formula 1 (GENF1) (page 2):
PNG
media_image4.png
222
274
media_image4.png
Greyscale
.
PNG
media_image5.png
581
419
media_image5.png
Greyscale
.
GENF1 shows a number of substituents which are independently viewed as functionally equivalent whereby upon selection give rise to obvious variants of GENF1.
One such variant reading on the compound of claim 1 is represented by Compd 6467A:
PNG
media_image2.png
242
485
media_image2.png
Greyscale
6467A corresponds to GEBF1 wherein X1-X5 = CH; RA = t-butyl; RC = H; RB = CN; L1 = O; L2 = direct bond; Y1 = Si
6467A reads on the compound of claim 1wherein the difference with the elected species is deuterated phenyl is replaced by CD3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to have made a variety of derivatives of GENF1 by selecting various functional equivalent substituents which would have included the above variant which reads on the instant limitations, absent unexpected results (per claims 1-5, 8-9).
Regarding Claims 12-14, Chen teaches applicant Compound of claim 1 and the compound of claim 2 wherein L4 = no bond; L1 = Si; L2 = O; L3 = direct bond; RA = CD3, Ring A = benzimidazole; K1-K4 = direct bond; M = Pt; Z4 = N ; Ring B = phenyl; Ring C = carbazole, RC = CN; Ring D = pyridine (per claims 12-14).
Regarding Claims 16-20, Chen teaches an OLED comprising: an anode; a cathode; and an organic layer, disposed between the anode and the cathode, comprising a compound, 6467A (paragraph 82) (per claim 16).
The emissive region further comprises a host, wherein the host comprises at least one group selected from the group consisting of metal complex, triphenylene, carbazole, dibenzothiophene, dibenzofuran, dibenzoselenophene, aza-triphenylene, aza-carbazole, aza-dibenzothiophene, aza-dibenzofuran, and aza-dibenzoselenophene (paragraph 100) (per claim 17).
The OLED further comprises a layer comprising a delayed fluorescent emitter (paragraph 93) (per claim 18).
OLED disclosed herein can be incorporated into one or more of a consumer product, an electronic component module, and a lighting panel (paragraph 104) (per claims 19-20).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY D CLARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7087. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-4PM M-F.
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 Chriss can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GREGORY D CLARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights