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 § 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 1-9 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.
Amended claim 1 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “Ar1 is selected from phenyl optionally substituted with F, CF3 or Si(CH3)3“ (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought is not clear as the substituents W1, W2, W3, W4 and W5 therein formula 1 are defined as being independently N or CRa wherein “each Ra is independently selected from H, F, CF3, and Si(CH3)3”. Claim fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the substituents W1, W2, W3, W4 and W5 in the claimed of formula 1.
Amended claim 2 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites the formulae 2 through 5; the scope of the protection sought is not clear, as claim 2 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim that each of the substituents W1 to W5, L1, L2, m and n are as defined for formula 1 in claim 1.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: some of the subscript substituent designations as well as single vs double bonds in the compounds of formulae 2 through 5 are not clearly distinguishable. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: some of the single versus double bonds in the recited compounds of formulae 6-1 through 6-514 are not clearly distinguishable. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itami et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,993,777).
Itami et al. teaches a heterocyclic compound inclusive of the compound of the present general formula 1, as well as the more specific formula 2 as recited in claim 2, as generally represented therein by
PNG
media_image1.png
166
344
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(column 2, line 15+; claims), and as more specifically represented therein by each of
PNG
media_image2.png
79
299
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and
PNG
media_image3.png
155
249
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, which respectively correspond to the compounds of the present formulae 6-1 and 6-25 as recited inclaim 3.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0253910).
Ma et al. teaches a heterocyclic compound inclusive of the compound of the present general formula 1, as well as the more specific formula 2 as recited in claim 2, and the compound of formula 6-129 as recited in claim 3, as generally represented therein by
PNG
media_image4.png
307
113
media_image4.png
Greyscale
([0020], [0021]; p.3).
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0040829) in view of either Itami et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,993,777) or Ma et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0253910).
Lee et al. discloses an organic electroluminescent device comprising a first electrode, an organic layer consisting of a plurality of layers arranged on the first electrode, a second electrode arranged on the organic layer, and a capping layer arranged on the second electrode, characterized in that said organic layer or the capping layer comprises a heterocyclic compound which appear to encompass those heterocyclic compounds of the present formula 1 and the more specific formula 2, as generally represented therein by
PNG
media_image5.png
174
387
media_image5.png
Greyscale
([0010], p.1; claims) and more specifically as represented therein by any one of
PNG
media_image6.png
146
381
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
153
374
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
147
382
media_image8.png
Greyscale
or
PNG
media_image9.png
155
375
media_image9.png
Greyscale
([0081], p.6; claims). However, Lee et al. does not expressly illustrate the heterocyclic compounds of the present formula 1 and the more specific formula 2.
The heterocyclic compounds of the present formula 1 and the more specific formula 2 are well known in the art as taught in either Itami et al. or Ma et al.; please refer to preceding paragraphs 10 and 11, respectively.
Although Lee et al. does not expressly organic electroluminescent device characterized by containing a heterocyclic compound inclusive of the present formula 1, they are well known in art, as taught in either Itami et al. or Ma et al. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the requisite art at the time the invention was filed to substitute the heterocyclic compound inclusive of the present formula 1 as taught in either Itami et al. or Ma et al., for those heterocyclic compounds inclusive utilized in the layers of the organic electroluminescent device of Lee et al., with reasonable expectations of achieving, absent object evidence to the contrary, the advantages taught therein, as well as those associated with their combination thereof.
Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0099131, which is the pre-grant publication corresponding to the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Geraldina Visconti whose telephone number is (571)272-1334. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Anthony J Zimmer can be reached at (571)270-3591. 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.
GERALDINA VISCONTI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1737
/GERALDINA VISCONTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights