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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The Specification filed 06/13/23 recites synthetic schemes on the following pages: 228, 229, 231-235, 237 (Synthetic Example 1-9 only), 239-242, 244, 245, 249-252, 254-256, 258, 259, 261-263, 265, 266, 268, 270 (Synthetic Example 1-38 only), 272-274, 280-283, 285-288, 290, 291, 293, 295, 297, 302 (Synthetic Example 1-66 only), 304-306, 317 (Synthetic Example 2-1 only), 318, 320, 324, 330-332, 334, 341, 342, 344, 347-348, 350, and 352 which are all graphically unclear due to their low resolutions and small sizes and fonts. They need to be replaced by graphics which are clearly legible and of sufficient size and font, with all bonds and atoms that are clearly drawn (i.e., with solid lines).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 7 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 “m’ is an integer of 0 to 6” which is beyond the scope of Chemical Formula 2 as n’ (and thus m’) is limited to an integer of 0 to 5 only.
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 § 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (WO 2020/080693 A1) in view of Hyun et al. (KR 10-2020-0100972).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication KR 10-2020-0100972 (herein referred to as “Hyun 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.
Lee et al. discloses a host material composition comprising a plurality of host materials (“at least two compounds”) comprising the light-emitting layer (interposed between a pair of electrodes) of an organic electroluminescent (EL) device; one host material is of formula I and another host material is of formula II ([5], [29]-[30], [146]). The host composition further comprises “an amine-based compound” ([149]). Lee et al. discloses the following embodiment for the host material of formula II:
PNG
media_image1.png
200
138
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 27) such that L = unsubstituted C10 arylene (naphthylene), Ar1-2 = unsubstituted C6 or C10 aryl (phenyl or naphthyl), n = 0, and Ar3 = hydrogen of Applicant’s Chemical Formulae I and 1-1. However, Lee et al. does not explicitly disclose the presence of a further compound of Applicant’s Chemical Formula 2.
Hyun et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image2.png
164
138
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 23 of Hyun et al.) such that n’ = 0, A’2 = hydrogen, and A1’ = Applicant’s Chemical Formula 2-a (with R’1 = Applicant’s Chemical Formula 2-b (with L’ = phenylene and Ar’2-3 = biphenyl or 9,9’-dimethylfluorenyl)) of Applicant’s Chemical Formulae 2 and 2-3. Hyun et al. discloses its inventive compounds as host material (for use in the light-emitting layer of an organic EL device) and/or as hole-transporting, electron-transporting, and/or electron-blocking material, the use of which results in a device with improved light-emitting and quantum efficiencies ([0001], [0194]). It would have been obvious to incorporate 67 as disclosed by Hyun et al. (above) into the light-emitting layer (as further host material) of the organic EL device as disclosed by Lee et al. The motivation is provided by the disclosure of Hyun et al. which teaches that the use of its inventive compounds in such a manner results in a device with improved light-emitting and quantum efficiencies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 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.
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication KR 10-2020-0100972 (herein referred to as “Hyun 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 Lee et al. (WO 2020/080693 A1) in view of Hyun et al. (KR 10-2020-0100972). Lee et al. discloses a host material composition comprising a plurality of host materials (“at least two compounds”) comprising the light-emitting layer (interposed between a pair of electrodes) of an organic electroluminescent (EL) device; one host material is of formula I and another host material is of formula II ([5], [29]-[30], [146]). The host composition further comprises “an amine-based compound” ([149]). Lee et al. discloses the following embodiment for the host material of formula II:
PNG
media_image1.png
200
138
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 27). However, Lee et al. does not explicitly disclose the presence of a further compound of Applicant’s Chemical Formula 2.
Hyun et al. discloses compounds of the following form:
PNG
media_image3.png
160
168
media_image3.png
Greyscale
([0016] of Hyun et al.); embodiments are disclosed such as the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
164
138
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 23 of Hyun et al.). Hyun et al. discloses its inventive compounds as host material (for use in the light-emitting layer of an organic EL device) and/or as hole-transporting, electron-transporting, and/or electron-blocking material, the use of which results in a device with improved light-emitting and quantum efficiencies ([0001], [0194]). However, it is the position of the Office that neither Lee et al. in view of Hyun et al. together nor in further combination with any other prior art discloses any of the compounds of Applicant’s Chemical Formula 2 as recited in the claim, particularly in regards to the nature of the substituents attached to the core dibenzofuran derivative.
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