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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/20/2023 and 02/01/2024 have each been considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it does not appear to describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. It is the Examiner's position that at least a chemical structure formula of Formula 1 should be shown in the abstract. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 4, it is suggested that "X is O or S" be deleted from the claim since the variable X does not appear to be further limited; and
in claim 7, it is suggested that "the organic layers" on line 6 be replaced with " the one or more organic layers" for ease of reading.
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.
Claims 8 and 9 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.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites "the organic layer comprises…" on line 2. It is unclear if "the organic layer" refers to the "one or more organic layers provided between the first electrode and the second electrode" or refers to one particular layer.
For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted such that "the organic layer comprises…" on line 2 is read as "the one or more organic layers comprise…"
Regarding claim 9 recites "the organic layer comprises an electron-blocking layer and a hole transport layer, and any one or more of the layers comprises the heterocyclic compound". First, is unclear if "the organic layer" on line 2 refers to the "one or more organic layers provided between the first electrode and the second electrode" or refers to one particular layer. Second, it is unclear whether the "any one or more of the layers" on lines 2-3 refers to the "one or more organic layers provided between the first electrode and the second electrode" or any one or more of the electron-blocking layer and the hole transport layer.
For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted such that "the organic layer comprises…" on line 2 is read as "the one or more organic layers comprise…" and such that the "any one or more of the layers" on lines 2-3 refers to any one of the one or more organic layers provided between the first electrode and the second electrode.
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 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oh et al. WO-2016122150-A2 (hereinafter "Oh-WO" and see English language machine translation referred to as "Oh-MT").
It is noted that WO-2016122150-A2 is cited on the IDS of 06/20/2023.
Regarding claims 1-5 and 7-9, Oh discloses an organic electric device including an organic material layer positioned between a first electrode and a second electrode, wherein the organic material layer includes a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, a light emitting auxiliary layer and a light emitting layer, wherein a compound represented by a Chemical Formula 1 is preferably contained in the hole transport layer or the light emitting auxiliary layer (Oh-MT, page 12 of 41, lines 16-24). Oh discloses examples of the compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 including compound P-35
PNG
media_image1.png
188
204
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 14), which is a heterocyclic compound represented by the claimed Formula 1 and Formula 2 wherein:
X is S;
Ar1 is a substituted C6 aryl group (a phenyl group), Ar2 is an unsubstituted C6 aryl group (a phenyl group), and Ar3 is an unsubstituted C25 aryl group (a spirobifluorenyl group);
R1 to R8 are each hydrogen;
L1 is an unsubstituted C12 heteroarylene group (a carbazolyl group) and L2 to L4 are each a direct bond;
m is 1; and
n is 1 and o, p, and q are each 0.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. WO-2013055132-A2 (hereinafter "Park-WO" and see English language machine translation referred to as "Park-MT").
It is noted that WO-2013055132-A2 is cited on the IDS of 06/20/2023.
Regarding claims 1-9, Park teaches an organic electric device including an organic material layer formed between an anode and a cathode, wherein an emission layer may be formed of a compound represented by a Chemical Formula 1 (Park-MT, page 5 of 20, lines 34-36). Park teaches that by using the compound, it is possible to obtain high luminous efficiency, low driving voltage, improved color purity, and improved lifetime (Park-MT, page 3 of 20, lines 1-2). Park teaches examples of the compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 including compound 3-20
PNG
media_image2.png
165
267
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(¶ [81]).
Park does not exemplify a compound of the claimed Formula 1. For example, the compound 3-20 differs from the claimed compound in the positions R9, R10, and R11 in the formulae of Park are hydrogen instead of the claimed -(L1)n-(Ar1)m. However, Park teaches R9, R10, and R11 may be a C6-C60 aryl group, among others (page 6 of 20, lines 12-16) and teaches specific examples of an aryl group include a phenyl group (page 3 of 20,lines 30-32).
Therefore, given the general formula and teachings of Park, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one of the hydrogen atoms at the positions R9, R10, and R11 with a phenyl group, because Park teaches the variable may suitably be selected as such. The substitution would have been one known element for another and one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would reasonably expect the predictable result that the modified compound would be useful in the emission layer of the device of Park and possess the beneficial properties of high luminous efficiency, low driving voltage, improved color purity, and improved lifetime taught by Park. See MPEP § 2143.I.(B).
The modified compounds of Park meet the claimed Formula 1, Formula 2 and one of the modified compounds corresponds to the claimed compound 156.
Holes are transported in the emission layer and therefore the emission layer may also be considered a hole transport layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Lee et al. US-20240172556-A1 recites an organic electric element in which compound represented by Formula 1 is used for a hole transport band layer (¶ [0009]), and recites examples of the compound represented by Formula 1 include P-93
PNG
media_image3.png
228
375
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(¶ [0123], page 27).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth M. Dahlburg whose telephone number is 571-272-6424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET, and alternate Fridays.
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 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.
/ELIZABETH M. DAHLBURG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights