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 .
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The group “Ar3” in the structure must be replaced by “Ar3” (i.e., with subscript) for consistency with Formula I as recited in parent Claim 1.
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.
Claim 2 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.
Claim 2, which is dependent on Claim 1, recites that Ar1 is selected from a “substituted or unsubstituted C10-C20 fused aromatic ring group” which lack antecedent basis. The Office has interpreted the “fused aromatic ring group” refers to a “fused-ring aryl” (as recited in the parent claim for Ar1) for the purpose of this Examination.
Correction is required.
Claim 8 is 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.
Claim 8, which is dependent on Claim 1, recites that X1-26 are independently selected from CR1 or N; however, the scope of R1 is nowhere defined.
Correction is required.
Claims 12 and 13 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.
Claim 12, which the other claim is dependent upon, recites Formula VI containing Ar4; however, the scope of Ar4 is nowhere defined.
Correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
The claim, which is dependent on Claim 1, recites that Ar2-3 are independently selected from a “substituted or unsubstituted C2-C20 nitrogen-containing fused-ring heteroaryl having an electron-withdrawing property” which is beyond the scope for Ar2-3 as recited in the parent claim. Notice that such a group must range from C4-C20.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
The claim, which is dependent on Claim 12, recites numerous groups for Ar2-3
such as the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
44
98
media_image1.png
Greyscale
which are not encompassed by the scope of Formula VI as the connection point of # must be connected to the fused 6-membered ring (i.e., to only one of X1-4).
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhai et al. (CN 115466262 A).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication CN 115466262 A (herein referred to as “Zhai et al.”) as then English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Zhai et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image2.png
170
178
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 24) such that Ar1 = unsubstituted C6 aryl (phenyl), L1-2 = unsubstituted C6 arylene (phenylene), Ar2 = substituted C8 nitrogen-containing fused-ring heteroaryl having electron-withdrawn property (phenyl-substituted heteroaryl), and Ar3 = unsubstituted C7 nitrogen-containing fused-ring heteroaryl having electron-withdrawing property of Applicant’s Formula I; X1 = X5 = N and X2-4 = X6-8 = CR1 (with R1 = hydrogen, phenyl or bond to L1) of Applicant’s Formula II; X1-4 = CR1 (with R1 = hydrogen), Y1 = O, and Y2 = N of Applicant’s Formula V. Zhai et al. further discloses an organic electroluminescent (EL) device for the construction of displays comprising a pair of electrodes, interposed therein comprising an organic layer comprising a capping layer comprising its inventive compounds ([n0011], [n0057]). The organic layer further comprises a light-emitting layer, electron-blocking layer, and the like ([n0052]).
Claims 1-7, 10, 11, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (CN 112952020 A).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication CN 112952020 A (herein referred to as “Yang et al.”) as then English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Yang et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image3.png
172
132
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 12 of Yang et al.) such that Ar1 = unsubstituted C10 fused-ring aryl (naphthyl), L1-2 = unsubstituted C6 or C14 arylene (phenylene or phenanthrenylene), Ar2 = unsubstituted C10 fused-ring aromatic group (naphthyl), and Ar3 = unsubstituted C7 nitrogen-containing fused-ring heteroaryl having an electron-withdrawing property of Applicant’s Formula I; X1-4 = CR1 (with R1 = hydrogen), Y1 = S, and Y2 = N of Applicant’s Formula V. Yang et al. discloses an organic electroluminescent (EL) device for the construction of displays comprising the following layers: substrate (1), anode (2), hole-injecting layer (3), hole-transporting layer (4), light-emitting layer (5), electron-transporting layer (6), electron-injecting layer (7), and cathode (8) (Fig. 1 of Yang et al.; [n0014], [n0050]); its inventive compounds comprise the light extraction layer which lie on top of the cathode or below the anode ([n0020], [n0046], [n0047]).
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 2, 6, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhai et al. (CN 115466262 A).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication CN 115466262 A (herein referred to as “Zhai et al.”) as then English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Regarding Claims 2 and 6, Zhai et al. discloses the phenanthrene organic compound of Claim 1 as shown above; the compound is shown below:
PNG
media_image2.png
170
178
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 24). Zhai et al. discloses that its inventive compounds corresponds to the following formula:
PNG
media_image4.png
120
180
media_image4.png
Greyscale
([0006] of Zhai et al.) where L2-3 = independently substituted or unsubstituted phenylene or phenanthrenylene (among others) and Ar1-2 = independently substituted or unsubstituted aryl or heteroaryl such as phenyl and naphthyl (among others) ([n0019], [n0026], [n0032]). However, Zhai et al. does not explicitly disclose the compound as recited in the claims. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify Compound P202 as disclosed by Zhai et al. (above) such that Ar1 = unsubstituted C10 fused-ring aromatic ring group (naphthyl) of Applicant’s Formula I. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves an exchange of one aryl group (phenyl) for a functional equivalent (another aryl, i.e., naphthyl) selected from a highly finite list of viable groups for any one of Ar1-2 as envisioned by Zhai et al., thus rendering the production predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claims 12 and 13, Zhai et al. does not explicitly disclose any of the compounds as recited in the claims. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify Compound P202 as disclosed by Zhai et al. (above) such that Ar3 =
PNG
media_image5.png
42
90
media_image5.png
Greyscale
of Applicant’s Formula I. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves change in the connection point of the heteroaryl group, producing a positional isomer that can be expected to have highly similar chemical and physical properties (and easily envisioned from the scope of Zhai et al.’s general formula), thus rendering the production predicable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (CN 112952020 A).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication CN 112952020 A (herein referred to as “Yang et al.”) as then English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Yang et al. discloses the phenanthrene organic compound of Claim 1 as shown above; the compound is shown below:
PNG
media_image3.png
172
132
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 12 of Yang et al.). Yang et al. discloses its inventive compounds to corresponds to the following formula:
PNG
media_image6.png
184
336
media_image6.png
Greyscale
([0008] of Yang et al.) where Ar1 = aryl or heteroaryl ([n0027]). However, Yang et al. does not explicitly disclose any of the compounds as recited in the claims. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify Compound LEL_32 as disclosed by Yang et al. (above) such that Ar3 =
PNG
media_image7.png
46
92
media_image7.png
Greyscale
of Applicant’s Formula I. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves change in the connection point of the heteroaryl group, producing a positional isomer that can be expected to have highly similar chemical and physical properties (and easily envisioned from the scope of Yang et al.’s general formula), thus rendering the production predicable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 14, and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims (and, for Claim 14, further amended to overcome the objection as set forth above).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication CN 112952020 A (herein referred to as “Yang et al.”) as then English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
The closest prior art is provided by Yang et al. (CN 112952020 A), which discloses compounds of the following form:
PNG
media_image6.png
184
336
media_image6.png
Greyscale
([0008] of Yang et al.) where Ar1 = aryl or heteroaryl ([n0027]). An embodiment is disclosed:
PNG
media_image3.png
172
132
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 12 of Yang et al.). However, it is the position of the Office that neither Yang et al. singly nor in further combination with any other prior art discloses any of the compounds as recited in the claims, particularly in regards to the nature of the substituent groups attached to the core phenanthrene group.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1137. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6am-3pm.
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 A 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.
/JAY YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights