CTNF 18/265,894 CTNF 83866 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-4, 6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Han et al. (CN-112341449, cited on Applicants information statement, filed on 6/7/23) . Claim 1: Han et al. teaches the compound PNG media_image1.png 220 220 media_image1.png Greyscale at the top of page 7. This compound anticipates Chemical Formula 2 of claim 1. As applied to Chemical Formula 1, this compound has Ar equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group, R 1 and R 3 through R 6 equal to hydrogen atoms, R 2 equal to Chemical Formula 3 of claim 1 with L, L 1 , and L 2 all equal to single bonds, Ar 1 equal to an unsubstituted dibenzofuran group, and Ar 2 equal to an unsubstituted spirobifluorenyl group. Claims 2-4: In the compound above, Ar is phenyl and L 1 -L 3 are single bonds, thereby anticipating claims 2-4. Claim 6: In the compound above R 2 is a group satisfying Chemical Formula 3 and all other R groups are equal to hydrogen atoms, thereby anticipating claim 6. Claim 9: In the compound above, L 1 is a single bond and Ar 1 is dibenzofuranyl, thereby anticipating claim 9 . 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 2, 4-6, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN-110734431, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 6/7/23) . Claim 1: Li et al. teaches compound (40) which has the structure PNG media_image2.png 148 166 media_image2.png Greyscale (page 20). This compound anticipates Chemical Formula 2 of claim 1. As applied to Chemical Formula 2, compound (40) has Ar equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group, R 1 and R 3 through R 6 equal to hydrogen atoms, and R 1 equal to a group satisfying Chemical Formula 3 with L equal to a phenyl-substituted triazine group, L 1 and L 2 are both equal to single bonds, Ar 1 is equal to a biphenyl group, and Ar 2 is equal to a 9,9-dimethylfluorenyl group. Claims 2 and 4: In compound (40), Ar is phenyl and L 1 and L 2 are each a single bond, thereby anticipating claims 2 and 4. Claim 5: In compound (40), Ar 1 is biphenyl and Ar 2 is dimethylfluorenyl, thereby anticipating claim 5. Claim 6: In compound (40), R 2 is a group represented by Chemical Formula 3 and all other R groups are equal to hydrogen atoms, thereby anticipating claim 6. Claim 9: For claim 9, the compound PNG media_image3.png 116 156 media_image3.png Greyscale as taught on page 20 of Li et al. is relied upon. This compound anticipates Chemical Formula 2 of claims 1 and 9. As applied to Chemical Formula 2, this compound has Ar equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group, R 1 and R 3 through R 6 equal to hydrogen atoms, and R 1 equal to a group satisfying Chemical Formula 3 with L equal to a phenyl-substituted triazine group, L 1 and L 2 are both equal to single bonds, Ar 2 is equal to a biphenyl group, and Ar 1 is equal to an unsubstituted dibenzofuran group. Claim 11: Compound (40) is taught as being a compound which is suitable to serve as a hole transport layer in organic electroluminescent devices comprising an anode, a hole transport region comprising said hole transport layer, an emission region, an electron transport region, and a cathode. The employment of any of the compounds explicitly taught by Li et al. in the manner taught in the device examples, including compound (40), is at once envisaged, thereby anticipating claim 11 . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/275,578 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 11 of the reference application is drawn to an organic light emitting device which comprises specific compounds which satisfy Chemical Formulae 2 or 3 and include many of the same compounds recited in claim 10 of the instant application. Additionally, said compounds also satisfy all of the structural limitations of claims 1-9 of the instant application, including as one example the second compound on the left column taught on page 1505 of US 2024/0196636 which is the pre-grant publication of the reference application. While the compounds in claim 11 of the reference application are part of an OLED, the compounds themselves are inherently disclosed and necessary to make said OLEDs. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/683,750 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 11 of the reference application is drawn to an organic light emitting device which comprises specific compounds which satisfy Chemical Formula 2 and include many of the same compounds recited in claim 10 of the instant application. Additionally, said compounds also satisfy all of the structural limitations of claims 1-9 of the instant application, including as one example the compound taught at the top left of page 833 of US 2024/0407257 which is the pre-grant publication of the reference application. While the compounds in claim 11 of the reference application are part of an OLED, the compounds themselves are inherently disclosed and necessary to make said OLEDs. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/570,592 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Claim 11 of the reference application is drawn to an organic light emitting device which comprises specific compounds which satisfy Chemical Formulae 2-1 or 1-2 and include many of the same compounds recited in claim 10 of the instant application. Additionally, said compounds also satisfy all of the structural limitations of claims 1-9 of the instant application, including as one example the second compound taught on the left column of page 2453 of US 2026/0123280 which is the pre-grant publication of the reference application. While the compounds in claim 11 of the reference application are part of an OLED, the compounds themselves are inherently disclosed and necessary to make said OLEDs. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 12 is 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. Additionally, claims 7, 8, 10, and 12 are free of any prior art rejections. Relevant Art Cited Additional prior art documents which are relevant to Applicants invention can be found on the attached PTO-892 form. Cho et al. (US 2020/0028089, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 6/7/23) was considered as a potential reference to be applied against Applicants instantly filed claims under 103. Cho et al. teaches compounds of general formula (1-4) which has the structure PNG media_image4.png 120 120 media_image4.png Greyscale (page 8). However, Cho et al. does not teach any compounds which satisfy Chemical Formula 1 of claim 1. The only compounds taught by Cho et al. have the N(R 5 )(R 6 ) group bonded at R 5 and R 6 and said compounds do not satisfy L 1 -Ar 1 as instantly claimed. Moreover, Cho et al. does not sufficiently teach groups which do satisfy L 1 -Ar 1 as claimed. Further still, Applicants instantly filed specification teaches some of the preferred compounds according to Cho et al. in comparative examples and teaches that compounds C-1, C-2, and C-3, which correspond to the preferred compounds H1-37, H1-41, and H1-29, respectively, have significantly lower current efficiencies and device lifetimes compared to compounds according to the instantly field claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S LOEWE whose telephone number is (571)270-3298. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1302. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /Robert S Loewe/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/265,894 Page 2 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/265,894 Page 3 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/265,894 Page 4 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/265,894 Page 5 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/265,894 Page 6 Art Unit: 1766
Prosecution Insights