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 .
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 1-5, 7-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al (KR2022/0136712) (Cha).
In reference to claims 11-16 and 18-19, Cha teaches compounds of formula 1 such as the compound shown below, right (Cha, claims 1 and 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
218
288
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
96
126
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It is noted that this compound is a positional isomer of the instantly claimed material and that Cha further exemplifies compounds wherein an amine is bonded at an ortho-position, and that the amine group is in no way limited to the meta or para positions. Furthermore, it is noted that compounds which are position isomers (compounds having the same radicals in physically different positions on the same nucleus) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. In re Wilder, 563 F.2d 457, 195 USPQ 426 (CCPA 1977). See also In re May, 574 F.2d 1082, 197 USPQ 601 (CCPA 1978) (stereoisomers prima facie obvious). In light of the case law cited above, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the compound disclosed in the present claims is but an obvious variant of the compound presently claimed, and thereby one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention.
For Claim 11: Reads on an amine compound of formula 2 wherein a1, a2 and a3 are each 0, Ar1 is phenyl and Ar2 is biphenyl, R2 and are R3 are each hydrogen and R1 is -N(Q1)(Q2), wherein each of Q1 and Q2 are a carbocyclic group.
For Claim 12: Reads on wherein the groups are different.
For Claim 13-14: Reads on wherein a1 to a3 is 0.
For Claim 15: Reads on unsubstituted benzene or benzene substituted benzene.
For Claim 16: Reads on 4-1.
For Claim 18: Reads on unsubstituted.
For Claim 19: Reads on 2-2.
In reference to claims 1-5 and 7-10, Cha teaches the compound as described above for claim 11 and further teaches that this compound is used in an device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic material layer between them comprising the compound and that the layer comprises a light emitting layer and an electron blocking layer wherein the blocking layer includes the compound that is used in an display panel or a touch panel or the like that implies the touch screen layer. Cha further teaches that when used in a device, these materials improve efficiency, driving voltage and/or lifespan characteristics. While Cha does not exemplify a device with this exact material and configuration it would have been immediately obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have used the taught material in the taught device structure with the expectation of providing a device with improved efficiency, driving voltage and/or lifespan characteristics as specifically taught by Cha (Cha [0237] [0190] [0270] [0016]).
Claims 1-5, 7 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo et al (US 20220393108) (Heo).
In reference to claims 11-20, Cha teaches compounds of chemical formula 1 as shown below (Cha [0008]),
PNG
media_image3.png
188
440
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
192
282
media_image4.png
Greyscale
for example, wherein in the chemical formula 1, X1 is H, X2 is H, X3 is H, R1 is methyl, R2 is methyl, k, l, m and n are each 1, L1, L2, L3 and L4 are each a direct bond, Ar2 is phenyl, and Ar1 is a substituted phenyl wherein the substituent is a methyl group or a compound 1 as shown above with an additional methyl substituent (Heo [0008] to [0018] [0026] [0037]).
Heo discloses the chemical formula 1 that encompasses the presently claimed compound, including wherein in the chemical formula 1, X1 is H, X2 is H, X3 is H, R1 is methyl, R2 is methyl, k, l, m and n are each 1, L1, L2, L3 and L4 are each a direct bond, Ar2 is phenyl, and Ar1 is a substituted phenyl wherein the substituent is a methyl group. Each of the disclosed substituents from the substituent groups of Heo are considered functionally equivalent and their selection would lead to obvious variants of the chemical formula 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application, in the absence of unexpected results, to have selected these substituents among those disclosed for the chemical formula 1 to provide the compound described above, which is both disclosed by Heo and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
For Claim 11: Reads on an amine compound of formula 2 wherein a1, a2 and a3 are each 0, Ar1 is phenyl and Ar2 is methyl substituted fluorenyl, R2 and are R3 are each hydrogen and R1 is methyl.
For Claim 12: Reads on wherein the groups are different.
For Claim 13-14: Reads on wherein a1 to a3 is 0.
For Claim 15: Reads on unsubstituted benzene or benzene substituted benzene.
For Claim 16: Reads on 4-1 or 4-11.
For Claim 17: Reads on R1 is methyl.
For Claim 18: Reads on R10a is methyl.
For Claim 19: Reads on 2-1.
For Claim 20: Reads on 301.
In reference to claims 1-5, 7, and 9-10, Heo teaches the compound as described above for claim 11 and further teaches that this compound is used in a device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic material layer between them comprising the compound and that the layer comprises a light emitting layer, a hole transfer layer and an electron transfer layer among others wherein the hole transfer layer includes the compound that is used in a display. Heo further teaches that when used in a device, these materials enhance lifetime, efficiency and stability of a device. While Heo does not exemplify a device with this exact material and configuration it would have been immediately obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have used the taught material in the taught device structure with the expectation of providing a device with improved efficiency, driving voltage and/or lifespan characteristics as specifically taught by Heo (Heo Fig 3, [0230] [0003] abstract, claim 8 etc.).
Claim 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Heo et al (US 20220393108) (Heo) as applied to claim 2 above and further in view of Forrest et al (US 2001/0000005) (Forrest).
In reference to claim 6, Heo teaches the device as described above for claim 2 and further teaches that the device structure can be a tandem or stacked device structure (Heo [0232] to [0235]). However, Heo does not expressly teach that the layers between the stacked emission layers are a second electrode.
With respect to the difference, Forrest teaches that the charge generation layer between such stacked layers can also be electrode transparent electrode layers anode/cathode (see e.g. fig 2 26M). Forrest teaches that this sort of device configuration is improved as it produces a fully transparent device that is suitable for heads-up displays or other applications and that it it can provide a low-cost, high resolution, high brightness, full color flat panel display of any size (Forrest [0099] to [0100]).
In light of the motivation of using transparent electrodes between stacks as described above, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the transparent electrodes between stacks as described by Forrest in order to produce a fully transparent device that is suitable for heads-up displays or other applications and provide a low-cost, high resolution, high brightness, full color flat panel display of any size and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean M DeGuire whose telephone number is (571)270-1027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 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, 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.
/Sean M DeGuire/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights