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 § 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 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lafzi et al. (J. Org. Chem. 2019, 84, 12120-12130).
Lafzi et al. teaches compound 18l, which has the structure
PNG
media_image1.png
190
158
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Scheme 5). This compound anticipates Formula 1 of claim 1. As applied to Formula 1, compound 18l has R2-R10 equal to hydrogen atoms and R1 equal to structural formula 3 with Y equal to a single bond, all R11-R13 equal to hydrogen atoms, and X5 and X6 equal to NR14 with R14 equal to a hydrogen atom.
Claims 1, 2, 5-7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (KR 2012-0120886, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 8/11/23).
Claims 1 and 2: Kim et al. teaches compound 35 which anticipates Formula 1 of claim 1. As applied to Formula 1, variables R2-R10 are equal to hydrogen atoms, R1 is equal to Structural Formula 2 with Y equal to a single bond, X3 and X4 equal to S, and all R11-R13 equal to hydrogen atoms, thereby anticipating claims 1 and 2.
Claims 5-7: The compounds disclosed by Kim et al., which includes compound 35, are employed as host materials in organic electroluminescent devices. The exemplified devices comprise an anode, a hole transport region, an emission region comprising a host material and dopant, an electron transport region, and a cathode. The preparation of an organic electroluminescent device as taught by Kim et al. with any one of the explicitly taught compound as a host material, including compound 35, is at once envisaged. A device comprising compound 35 as a host material in the manner disclosed by Kim et al. satisfies all of the device limitations of claims 5-7.
Claim 9: Each of the layers in the organic electroluminescent devices taught by Kim et al. are exemplified to be applied via a deposition process, thereby anticipating claim 9.
Claims 1 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee (WO 2021/150092). Copies of the original and a machine translation are included with this Office action.
Claim 1: Lee et al. teaches compounds which are employed as host materials in organic electroluminescent devices. Included in the explicitly taught compounds is the compound
PNG
media_image2.png
124
102
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 16). This compound anticipates Formula 1 of claim 1. As applied to Formula 1, this compound has R1-R3 and R5-R10 equal to hydrogen atoms, R4 equal to Structural Formula 1 with X1 and X2 equal to O, all R11-R13 equal to hydrogen atoms, and Y equal to a deuterated anthracenyl group.
Claims 5-9: The device examples of Lee et al. are electroluminescent devices comprising an anode, a hole transport region, an emission layer comprising a host material which is one of the inventive compounds taught therein and a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material which is exemplified to be BD-A which has the structure
PNG
media_image3.png
138
160
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 188), an electron transport region, and a cathode. The employment of any one of the explicitly taught host materials of Lee et al., including the compound shown above, as a host material is at once envisaged. Such a device comprising the compound above and the boron-based dopant BD-A anticipates all of the device limitations of claims 5-9. As applied to claim 9 the dopant BD-A anticipates Formula D3 with X1 equal to B, Y1 and Y2 equal to N-R61 with R61 equal to p-tert--butylphenyl groups, T1 through T3 equal to benzene rings which are substituted with either t-butyl groups are diphenylamino groups.
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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (KR-20120120886).
The devices disclosed by Kim et al. are employed as organic electroluminescent devices. Because the devices taught by Kim et al. are light emitting devices, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have prepared a display device or lighting system comprising the devices taught by Kim et al.
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee (WO 2021/150092).
The devices disclosed by Lee et al. are employed as organic electroluminescent devices. Because the devices taught by Lee et al. are light emitting devices, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have prepared a display device or lighting system comprising the devices taught by Lee et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 4 are 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. The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest compounds which satisfy Formula 1 where one of R1 through R10 is a substituted or unsubstituted aryl group as required by claim 3. The prior art also does not teach or fairly suggest the compounds of claim 4.
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