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 .
Foreign Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application JP2021-039855 filed in Japan on March 12, 2021.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)- (d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The compounds and formulas across the specification are low resolution. It is difficult to discern the labels, variables, atoms, and bonds in the structures. Examples are compounds of Chem. 3, Chem. 4, Chem. 7, Chem. 8, Chem. 9, Chem. 10, Chem. 13, but are not limited to these.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: The compounds are low resolution. It is difficult to discern the labels, variables, atoms, and bonds in the structures. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (US 2017/0141322 A1) in view of Togashi et al. (US 2019/0378989 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cha teaches OLEDs with an amine compound of Chemical Formula A
PNG
media_image1.png
516
568
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in a hole transport layer, a hole injection layer, or an electron-blocking layer, exhibiting high luminous efficiency, long lifespan, and low driving voltages (para. 0014). Cha teaches that a specific compound of General Formula A, Chemical Formula 76 that reads on the monomer of general formula (1) of instant application.
PNG
media_image2.png
749
1209
media_image2.png
Greyscale
where in the claimed chemical formula (1),
R1 and R2 are each an unsubstituted alkyl group having 1 carbon atom
X is oxygen
R3 to R16 are each a hydrogen atom
n is 0
Cha does not teach that Chemical Formula 76 is a repeating unit of a high molecular weight compound.
Togashi teaches a high molecular weight compound of General Formula (1)
PNG
media_image3.png
413
572
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, a similar compound to that of Cha arylamine. Togashi teaches that substituted triarylamine structures have high hole injection/transport capability (para. 0017). Additionally, Togashi teaches that synthesizing high molecular compounds of a triarylamine provides the additional benefit of heat resistance and thin film stability (para. 0017).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to polymerize compound 76 of Cha. This would have been applying the known improvement of polymerization of triarylamines taught by Togashi in the device of Cha, an advancement known in the art, to obtain the benefit of heat resistance and thin film stability. See MPEP 2143.I.(C).
PNG
media_image4.png
747
1209
media_image4.png
Greyscale
By polymerizing the triarylamine or Cha, modified Chemical Formula 76 reads on the instant claim as a repeating unit of a high molecular weight compound.
Regarding claim 2, modified Cha further teaches wherein modified Chemical Formula 76 is represented by general formula (2)
PNG
media_image5.png
647
1210
media_image5.png
Greyscale
where in the claimed chemical formula (2),
R1 to R19, X, and n are the same as in claim 1 for general formula (1)
R20 to R22 are each a hydrogen atom
Y represents a hydrogen atom
m is 0.33 (or 1/3), which falls within the claimed range.
p is 0.67 (or 2/3) which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 3, modified Cha further teaches wherein X is an oxygen atom as defined for claim 1 above in paragraph 12.
Regarding claim 4, modified Cha further teaches wherein R12 to R19 are each a hydrogen atom as defined for claim 1 above in paragraph 12.
Regarding claim 5, modified Cha further teaches wherein R3 to R11 are each a hydrogen atom as defined for claim 1 above in paragraph 12.
Regarding claim 6, modified Cha further teaches wherein R3 to R22 are each a hydrogen atom as defined for claim 2 above in paragraph 12.
Regarding claim 7, modified Cha further teaches wherein Y is a hydrogen atom as defined for claim 2 above in paragraph 12.
Regarding claim 8, modified Cha further teaches wherein R1 and R2 are each an alkyl group.
Regarding claim 9, modified Cha teaches the high molecular weight compound according to claim 1 as described above in paragraph 12.
In modified Chemical Formula 76, Cha does not specifically teach a thermally cross-linkable structural unit as a repeating unit.
However, Togashi teaches that the addition of structural units of formulas (3a) to (3x) in Figs. 16 to 21, enhance the thermal crosslinkability of the polymers (para. 0115 and 0126). In Table 2 Togashi shows Example 6, where the addition of the thermal cross-linkable unit to a high molecular weight compound improves the residual film ratio from 28.9% to 95.7%, thus improving thermal crosslinkability of the high molecular weight compound (para. 0286, Table 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Chemical Formula 76 triarylamine polymer of modified Cha by incorporating a thermally cross-linkable structural unit, because this would have been combining the prior art elements of modified Cha and Togashi according to known methods to yield predictable results of a triarylamine polymer with enhanced thermal crosslinkability, as taught by Togashi. See MPEP 2143.I.(A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention further modify Chemical Formula 76 triarylamine polymer of modified Cha with the thermally cross-linkable structural unit of high molecular compound A of Togashi, because it would have been choosing one thermally cross-linkable structural unit of Togashi, which would have been a choice from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions of a structural unit useful as the thermally cross-linkable structural unit for Chemical Formula 76 in the OLED device of Cha and possessing the benefits taught by Togashi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to produce additional high molecular weight compounds comprising the thermally cross-linkable structural unit having the benefits taught by Togashi in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.I.(E).
PNG
media_image6.png
445
802
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Further modified Chemical Formula 76 reads on the instant claim as wherein the high molecular weight compound comprises a thermally cross-linkable structural unit as a repeating unit.
Regarding claim 10, further modified Cha teaches wherein the thermally cross-linkable structural unit is 3ai
PNG
media_image7.png
327
362
media_image7.png
Greyscale
. Where in the claimed thermally cross-linkable structural unit, R is a hydrogen atom, a is 0, and b is 0.
Regarding claim 11, modified Cha further teaches an organic electroluminescent device (organic light-emitting diode, para. 0073) comprising a pair of electrodes (first and second electrode, para. 0073), and at least one layer of an organic layer interposed therebetween (an organic layer interposed between the first and second electrode (para. 0073), wherein the organic layer contains the high molecular weight compound according to claim 1 (Cha teaches that the organic layer comprises at least one of the amine compounds of their disclosure, such as Chemical Formula 76, para. 0073).
Regarding claim 12, modified Cha further teaches wherein the organic layer comprising the compound is a hole transport layer (para. 0074).
Regarding claim 13, modified Cha further teaches wherein the organic layer comprising the compound is an electron blocking layer (para. 0074).
Regarding claim 14, modified Cha further teaches wherein the organic layer comprising the compound is a hole injection layer (para. 0074).
Regarding claim 15, modified Cha further teaches wherein the organic layer comprising the compound is a light-emitting layer (para. 0074).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADRIANA P CLAUDIO VAZQUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at (571)270-7692. 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.
/APCV/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/JENNA N CHANDHOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights