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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Chemical Formula a in independent claim 1 recites that X1 to X4 is independently CH or N with at least two of X1 to X4 being N. One of X1 through X4 necessarily is bonded to Chemical Formula 1, leaving only three groups, two or three of which being equal to N and zero or one being equal to CH. However, the ring containing X1-X4 also contains the variable Ar1 which as claimed, may be equal to groups other than hydrogen, such as an aryl group. This necessarily means that one of X1-X4 is joined to Chemical Formula 1, two or three of X1-X4 are equal to N, and zero or one of X1-X4 are equal to CH, which means that there are no embodiments where Chemical Formula a may comprise Ar1, other than Ar1 being equal to hydrogen. For purposes of further examination, it will be interpreted that Ar1 is present and may be a group other than hydrogen, two of X1 to X4 are N, and the remaining X1-X4 which is not N is bonded to Chemical Formula 1 is C-Ar1. This is due to the fact that there actually cannot be embodiments where three of X1-X4 in Chemical Formula a are equal to N. In such an embodiment, no Ar1 group can be present. Claims 2-15 are included in this rejection as they are dependent from claim 1. Correction is required.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 8 recites that “the aryl group and the heteroaryl group of Ar1 are substitutable with one or more kinds of substituents”. However, this limitation renders the claim indefinite since “one or more kinds of substituents” raises the question as to whether or not the claim is limited to the substituents listed. To overcome this rejection, the Examiner suggests amending claim 8 to “The compound of claim 1, where Ar1 is selected from a C6-C60 aryl group and a C5-C60 heteroaryl group which may be substituted with deuterium, halogen, a cyano group…”
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) 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. Chemical Formula a as described in the 112(b) rejection above, can only have two of X1-X4 equal to N, as one of X1-X4 must be bonded to Chemical Formula 1 and one of X1-X4 is bonded to Ar. As such, claim 6 does not further limit claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2023/0111751).
Claim 1: Lee et al. teaches the compound Z1-22 which has the structure
PNG
media_image1.png
110
170
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 214). This compound anticipates Chemical Formula 1 of claim 1. As applied to Chemical Formula 1, this compound has Q1-Q3 equal to an unsubstituted C6 aromatic ring (benzene) (a, b, and c equal to zero), d is equal to zero, n is equal to zero (L is a single bond) and A is a group which anticipates Chemical Formula a with Y equal to S, Ar2 equal to a hydrogen atom, X3 being bonded to Chemical Formula 1, X2 and X4 being equal to N, and X1 equal to C-Ar1 with Ar1 equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group.
Claim 2: Compound Z1-22 also anticipates Chemical Formula 2 of claim 2 with a, b, c, d, and n equal to zero and A being described in claim 1 above.
Claim 3: Compound Z1-22 also anticipates Chemical Formula 6 of claim 3 with n equal to zero and A being described in claim 1 above.
Claim 4: Compound Z1-22 also anticipates Chemical Formula 16 of claim 4 with all variable assignments being described in claim 1 above.
Claim 5: In compound Z1-22, linker L is a single bond, which anticipates claim 5.
Claim 6: In compound Z1-22, two of X1-X4 are equal to N, thereby anticipating claim 6.
Claim 8: In compound Z1-22, Ar1 is equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group, thereby anticipating claim 8.
Claims 13-15: The compounds taught by Lee et al., including compound Z1-22 are taught and employed in organic electroluminescent devices comprising an anode, a hole transport region, an emission layer, an electron transporting region, and a cathode, where the compounds including compound Z1-22 is employed in an emission layer as an electron-transporting host material. The employment of any one of the explicitly taught electron-transporting host materials, which includes compound Z1-22 is at once envisaged, thereby anticipating claims 13-15.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee A (US 2019/0386227).
Claim 1: Lee A teaches the compound
PNG
media_image2.png
172
182
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 22). This compound anticipates Chemical Formula 1 of claim 1. As applied to claim 1, this compound has Q1-Q3 equal to benzene rings, a, c, d, and n equal to zero, b equal to 1, R2 equal to 3,5-diphenyltriazinyl, and A equal to a group satisfying Chemical Formula a with Y equal to S, Ar2 equal to a hydrogen atom, X1 being bonded to Chemical Formula 1, X2 and X4 being N, and X3 being equal to C-Ar1 with Ar1 equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group.
Claim 2: The compound above also anticipates Chemical Formula 2 of claim 2 with all variable assignments being described in claim 1 above.
Claim 4: The compound above also anticipates Chemical Formula 16 of claim 4 with all variable assignments being described in claim 1 above.
Claim 5: In the compound above, linker L is a single bond, which anticipates claim 5.
Claim 6: In the compound above, two of X1-X4 are equal to N, thereby anticipating claim 6.
Claim 7: Variable A in the compound above is represented by Chemical Formula a-1 of claim 7, thereby anticipating claim 7.
Claim 8: In the compound above, Ar1 is equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group, thereby anticipating claim 8.
Claims 13-15: The compounds taught by Lee A, including the compound shown above, are taught and employed in organic electroluminescent devices comprising an anode, a hole transport region, an emission layer, an electron transporting region, and a cathode, where the compounds including the compound above are employed in an emission layer as an electron-transporting host material. The employment of any one of the explicitly taught electron-transporting host materials, including the compound above is at once envisaged, thereby anticipating claims 13-15.
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 of this title, 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.
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 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2023/0111751), as applied to claim 1.
While Lee et al. does not teach a compound which satisfies the structural limitations of claim 7 or the specific compounds of claim 9, it is submitted that the preparation compound 1 as recited in claim 9 would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art given the overall teachings of Lee et al. Compound Z1-22 differs from compound 1 of claim 9 in that the diazabenzothiophene group in compound Z1-22 is bonded at a different ring atom than compound 1 (the 3-position vs. the 1-position). However, positional isomers are explicitly taught by Lee et al. Compound Z1-22 is a specific compound which adheres to general formula 2-C-1 of Lee et al. as taught in paragraph 0154. Formula 2-C-1 is not limited to only one positional isomer. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found the preparation of other positional isomers, including a positional isomer which satisfies Chemical Formula a-1 of claim 7, prima facie obvious as such isomers are shown in Formula 2-C-1. Additionally, compound Z1-33 is one such positional isomer, which has the diazabenzothiophene group bonded at the 2-position, for example. A compound which has the diazabenzothiophene group bonded at the 1-position affords a compound which has the same bonding as the compounds recited in claim 9. The positional isomer of compound Z1-22, which is bonded at the 1-position of the diazabenzothiophene group satisfies compound 1 of claim 9.
Claims Free of Prior Art
While all claims stand rejected, claims 10-12 are free of any prior art rejections. The compounds recited in claims 10 and 11 are novel and unobvious over the prior art of record. Only through impermissible hindsight could such compounds be envisioned based on the art of record. Claim 12 requires the employment of compounds of Chemical Formula 1 in an electron transport layer. The Lee references above employs the compounds taught therein as host materials in emission layers. Neither Lee reference teaches or fairly suggests employing compounds of Chemical Formula 1 in an electron transport layer or an electron transport auxiliary layer as required by claim 12.
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
Prosecution Insights