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.
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.
Claims 6, 7 and 14-16 are 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 clams, which are dependent on Claim 1, recites structures of Formula I where Y = NR which lie beyond the scope as recited in the parent claim. Notice that Claim 1 fails to include NR as a possibility in the Markush group for Y. The Office has interpreted, based on the present Specification and the dependent claims, that the Markush group for Y also includes NR in Formula I as recited in Claims 1, 17, and 20 for the purpose of this Examination.
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 § 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, 2, 4-9, 12-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. (US 2019/0036045 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 9, 12-15, and 17-20, Hwang et al. discloses the
following compound:
PNG
media_image1.png
286
390
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 42) such that Y = NR (with R = alkyl (methyl)), X1-4 = C, RD = CN, Z5-6 = C, RCs = aryl (phenyl) or alkyl (t-butyl), moiety C = 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene), moiety A = 6-membered heterocyclic ring (pyridine), Z1-2 = C, RA = hydrogen, moiety B = 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene), Z3-4 = C, RB = hydrogen, a = 0, b = 1, L2= direct bond, c = 1, L3 = direct bond, ᴋ3 = O, and ᴋ1-2 = direct bond of Applicant’s Formula I. Hwang et al. further discloses an organic electroluminescent (EL) device comprising the following layers: anode, hole-injecting layer, hole-transporting layer, electron-blocking layer, light-emitting layer, hole-blocking layer, electron-transporting layer, electron-injecting layer, and cathode for the construction of displays and the like ([0003], [0247]-[0248]); its inventive compounds serve as dopant material in combination with host material ([0047], [0235], [0244]). Host materials include the following:
PNG
media_image2.png
202
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
where h = g = 0 and Ar113-114 = naphthyl ([0293]-[0294], [0296]) such that RA’-C’ = hydrogen of the Applicant’s formula as recited in Claim 19.
Regarding Claim 7, Hwang et al. discloses another embodiment:
PNG
media_image3.png
250
394
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 39) such that RC = hydrogen and Y = NR (with R = aryl (phenyl)) of Applicant’s Formula I.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ye et al. (CN 114773395 A).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of
foreign document publication CN 114773395 A (herein referred to as “Ye et al.”) as the English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Regarding Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12-14, 17, and 20, Ye et al. discloses the
following compound:
PNG
media_image4.png
178
153
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(page 6 of Ye et al.) such that Y = NR (with R = aryl (phenyl)), X1 = N, X2-4 = C, RD = alkyl (t-butyl), moiety C = 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene), Z5-6 = C, RC = hydrogen, moiety A = fused polycyclic ring system (benzimidazole), RAs = aryl (phenyl) or alkyl (t-butyl), Z1 = N, Z2 = C, moiety B = fused polycyclic ring system (spirofluorene), Z3-4 = C, a = 1, L1= direct bond, b = 1, L2 = direct bond, c = 0, ĸ2 = O, and ĸ1 = ĸ3 = direct bond of Applicant’s Formula I. Ye et al. further discloses an organic electroluminescent (EL) for the construction of displays comprising the following layers: anode, hole-injecting layer, hole-transporting layer, light-emitting layer, hole-blocking layer, electron-injecting/transporting layer, and cathode ([n0032], [n0034]); its inventive compounds serve as dopant (guest) material in combination with host material in the light-emitting layer ([n0033], [n0047], [n0049]).
Regarding Claims 8 and 15, alternatively, notice that moiety B = 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene) and plurality of RBs joined or fused to form a ring (spirofluorene) of Applicant’s Formula I.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US 2019/0036045 A1).
Hwang et al. discloses the compound of Claim 1 as shown above. The compound is shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
286
390
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 42). Hwang et al. discloses its inventive compounds to be encompassed by the following formula:
PNG
media_image5.png
282
398
media_image5.png
Greyscale
([0009]) where the moiety comprising rings CY2 and CY5 is any one of the following (among others):
PNG
media_image6.png
518
418
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
168
388
media_image7.png
Greyscale
(pages 21-22). However, Hwang et al. does not explicitly disclose any of the compounds as recited in the claim. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to modify compound 67 as disclosed by Hwang et al. (above) such that one of X1-4 = N of Applicant’s Formula 1. The motivation is provided by the fact that the modification merely involves an exchange of one group for a functional equivalent selected from a highly finite list of possible ligand groups as identified by Hwang et al., thus rendering the production predictable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (CN 114773395 A) as applied above and in further view of Kato et al. (US 2014/0008633 A1).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of
foreign document publication CN 114773395 A (herein referred to as “Ye et al.”) as the English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Ye et al. discloses the organic electroluminescent (EL) device (OLED) of Claim 17 as shown above. Ye et al. discloses that its inventive compounds serve as dopant (guest) material, which is in combination with host material in the light-emitting layer ([n0033], [n0047], [n0049]). However, Ye et al. does not explicitly disclose any of the host compounds as recited in the claims.
Kato et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image8.png
396
410
media_image8.png
Greyscale
(page 6) such that RD’ = hydrogen, X4-6 = C, RB’-C’ = hydrogen, X1-3 = C, and plurality of RA’s = joined or fused to form a ring (N-phenylcarbazolyl) of the formula as recited in Claim 19. Kato et al. discloses examples of phosphorescent hosts include carbazole derivatives ([0094]); the use of its inventive compounds results in a device with low driving voltage and long lifetime (Abstract). It would have been obvious to incorporate the above as disclosed by Kato et al. (above) into the light-emitting layer of the organic EL device as disclosed by Ye et al. The motivation is provided by the disclosure of Ye et al., which discloses the use of carbazole derivatives as (phosphorescent) host materials, in addition to the further disclosure that the use of its inventive compounds results in a device with low driving voltage and long lifetime.
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.
The closest prior art is provided by Hwang et al. (US 2019/0036045 A1), which discloses compounds of the following form:
PNG
media_image5.png
282
398
media_image5.png
Greyscale
([0009]); an embodiment is disclosed:
PNG
media_image1.png
286
390
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 42). However, it is the position of the Office that neither Hwang et al. singly nor in further combination with any other prior art discloses any of the compounds as recited in the claim, particularly in regards to the nature of the tetradentate ligand coordinated to the Pt atom.
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