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 07/19/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the chemical structures displayed on pages 96-98, 103-105, 114-115, 124-126, 129-130, 150-151, 157, 160, are of poor resolution.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 1 it is suggested that the comma after "device" and before "comprising" be deleted for ease of reading; and
in claim 7, it appears there is an extraneous space between "is" and "hydrogen" in the definition of R23.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. KR-2413260-B1 (hereinafter "Cho-KR and see English language machine translation referred to herein as "Cho-MT") in view of Hatayama et al. JP-2021038206-A (hereinafter "Hatakeyama-JP and see English language machine translation referred to herein as "Hatakeyama-MT").
It is noted that KR-2413260-B1 is cited on the IDS of 07/19/2023.
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 14, Cho discloses an organic light emitting device comprising one or more organic material layers provided between a first electrode and a second electrode (Cho-MT, page 14 of 35, lines 9 to 12), wherein the one or more organic material layers comprises an emission layer and the emission layer comprises a boron-containing fused polycyclic compound of Formula 1 (Cho-MT, page 14 of 35, lines 22-23). Cho discloses specific examples of the compound of Formula 1 including
PNG
media_image1.png
118
190
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Cho-KR, page 10). Cho teaches the compound of Formula 1 has structural stability (Cho-MT, page 2 of 35, lines 25-26).
Cho does not exemplify a compound of Formula 1 that meets the claimed Formula 1. For examples, the compound shown above differs from the claimed compound of Formula 1 in that the biphenyl substituent group is a meta- substituted instead of an ortho-substituted.
Hatakeyama teaches a boron-containing fused polycyclic compounds for use in an organic light emitting device (Hatakeyama-MT, page 1 of 88, lines 5-6 and 14-16), represented by a Formula (1)
PNG
media_image2.png
168
225
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Hatakeyama-JP, page 2) and teaches wherein Z may preferably be a phenyl group (see wherein Z is preferably represented by formula (Z1), Hatakeyama-JP, page 15 of 88, line 19). Hatakeyama teaches the presence of the bulky substituent Z at an ortho position where the surrounding space is restricted can suppress intermolecular association and suppress concentration quenching (page 15 of 88, lines 13-15 and 26-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the compound of Cho to make the positional isomer wherein the biphenyl substituent group is ortho-substituent, based on the teaching of Hatakeyama. The motivation for doing so would have been to restrict the surrounding space to suppress intermolecular association and suppress concentration quenching, as taught by Hatakeyama.
The modified compound reads on the claimed Formula 1 and 5-1 wherein:
X is O;
R1 to R8 are each hydrogen;
n is an integer of 0 to 3;
n2 to n6 are each an integer of 0 to 4; and
n7 is an integer of 0 to 5.
Regarding claims 2-6 and 15-17, Cho teaches the modified compound as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 14.
Cho does not exemplify a compound of Formula 1 that meets the claimed Formulae 2, 3-1 to 3-4, or 4-1 to 4-4.
However, Cho teaches wherein R2, R3, and R5 may be an alkyl group, an aryl group, a heteroaryl group, among others (Cho-MT, page 10 of 34, lines 27-31 and page 13 of 35, lines 1-3) and teaches exemplary compounds wherein R2 and R3 are each a phenyl group (Cho-KR, page 10) and wherein R5 is a t-butyl or phenyl group (Cho-KR, page 11).
Therefore, given the general formula and teachings of Cho, 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 the positions R2 and R3 with a phenyl group and R5 with a t-butyl or phenyl group, because Cho teaches the variable may suitably be selected as such and teaches exemplary compounds where the variable is 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 Cho and possess the beneficial properties of structural stability taught by Cho. See MPEP § 2143.I.(B).
Claims 8-11 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. KR-2413260-B1 (hereinafter "Cho-KR and see English language machine translation referred to herein as "Cho-MT") in view of Hatayama et al. JP-2021038206-A (hereinafter "Hatakeyama-JP and see English language machine translation referred to herein as "Hatakeyama-MT") as applied to claims 1 and 14 and further in view of Jung et al. US-20230309403-A1 (hereinafter "Jung").
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claims 8-11 and 18-20, Cho teaches the modified compound as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 14.
Cho does not exemplify a compound of Formula 1 that meets the claimed Formulae 6, 7-1 to 7-3, 8-1 to 8-3, or that corresponds to one of the compounds in claimed Compound Group 1. However, Cho teaches wherein R2 to R5 may be an aryl group, a heteroaryl group, among others (Cho-MT, page 10 of 34, lines 27-31; page 12 of 25, lines 3-5; and page 13 of 35, lines 1-3) and Cho teaches the heteroaryl group includes a carbazole group (page 5 of 35, lines 3-12), which may be deuterated (Cho-Mt, page 2 of 35, line 33).
Jung also teaches a boron-containing fused polycyclic compound of a Formula 1 for use in the emission layer of an organic light emitting device
PNG
media_image3.png
290
436
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(¶ [0027]). Jung teaches the ortho-type terphenyl group connected to the nitrogen atom secures a steric shielding effect to exhibit stable compound properties and achieve greater lifespan of the element (¶ [0147], ¶ [0143]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select R4 of Cho's Formula 1 as a phenyl group such that the group form the ortho-type terphenyl group, based on the teaching of Jung. The motivation for doing so would have been to achieve greater lifespan of the element, as taught by Jung.
Additionally, given the general formula and teachings of Cho, 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 the positions R2 and R3 with a phenyl group or carbazolyl group and R5 with a t-butyl or phenyl group, because Cho teaches the variable may suitably be selected as such and teaches exemplary compounds where the variable is 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 Cho and possess the beneficial properties of structural stability taught by Cho. See MPEP § 2143.I.(B).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. KR-2413260-B1 (hereinafter "Cho-KR and see English language machine translation referred to herein as "Cho-MT") in view of Hatayama et al. JP-2021038206-A (hereinafter "Hatakeyama-JP and see English language machine translation referred to herein as "Hatakeyama-MT") as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Kim et al. US-20200199164-A1 (hereinafter "Kim").
Regarding claims 12-13, Cho teaches the device comprising the modified compound as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Cho does not exemplify a device wherein the emission layer further comprises at least one selected from among a second compound represented by Formula HT-1 and a third compound represented by Formula ET-1 and wherein the emission layer further comprises a fourth compound represented by Formula D-1.
Kim teaches an organic light-emitting device comprising an organometallic compound of a Formula 1 in an emission layer as a dopant (¶ [0007]-[0009] and [00036]), wherein the emission layer further comprises a host (¶ [0282]) and the host includes at least one selected from TPBi, TBADN, ADN, CBP, CDBP, TCP, mCP, Compound H50, and Compound H52 (¶ [0283]). Kim teaches examples of the organometallic compound of a Formula 1 in paragraph [0228]. Kim teaches that due to the inclusion of the organic layer including the organometallic compound represented by Formula 1, the organic light-emitting device has a low driving voltage, high efficiency, high power, high quantum efficiency, a long lifespan, a low roll-off ratio, and excellent color purity (¶ [0239]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the emission layer of Kim into the emission region of the device of Cho, based on the teaching of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to obtain a device having a low driving voltage, high efficiency, high power, high quantum efficiency, a long lifespan, a low roll-off ratio, and excellent color purity, as taught by Kim.
The organometallic compound of Kim meets the claimed Formula D-1, CBP, CDBP, TCP, and mCP, meet the claimed Formula HT-1, and mCP, Compound H50, and Compound H52 each meet the claimed Formula ET-1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: KR-2020145746-A, cited on the IDS of 07/19/2023, discloses a boron-containing fused polycyclic compounds including 1-90
PNG
media_image4.png
178
225
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(page 48).
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