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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2022-0151501, filed on 11/14/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/05/2023 was filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 10/05/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The letters, numbers, and/or bonds in the chemical structure given in paragraph [0088] are illegible due to poor resolution. Please correct these structures so all letters, numbers, and/or bonds are clearly visible.
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 1-19 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyata et al. (US 2018/0170914 A1) in view of Hatakeyama et al. (EP 3109253 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Miyata discloses an organic light emitting diode including a first electrode (an anode), a second electrode (a cathode), and an emissive layer between the electrodes including a light emitting layer including a compound of general formula (1) (paragraph 0055), such as compound T-128 (page 36), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
392
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
General formula (1) and compound T-128 above may also be represented by general formula (36) (paragraph 0192 and page 15) when A5 is represented by General formula A-2, and D1 and D3 are represented by General formula D-1, which are pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
127
482
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
144
372
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
132
456
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In General formula A-2, Miyata also teaches that one of X1 and X2 is a carbon atom, and the other is a nitrogen atom (paragraph 0214, lines 1-2) and that examples of the group represented by General formula D-1 include indolocarbazole (paragraph 0228, line 5).
When compound T-128 is modified to comprise the nitrogen atom and indolocarbazole groups taught by Miyata, it forms a compound that meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula 1 when R1 is hydrogen, and R2 and R3 are represented by Chemical Formula 2. In both instances of Chemical Formula 2, R11-R14 and R17-R18 are hydrogen atoms and R15 and R16 are linked together to form a structure of Chemical Formula 3. In Chemical Formula 3, X1 is NR25 and R21-R25 are hydrogen atoms.
Miyata includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Miyata being a lack of the aforementioned indolocarbazole and nitrogen atom combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a pi-conjugated compound with an electron withdrawing, nitrogen-containing aromatic six-membered ring (paragraph 0151) (A) and a plurality of electron-donating groups (D) substituted on the benzene ring in an ortho position to the electron withdrawing group, wherein the electron-donating groups can spatially resonate to stabilize the positive charge carried by the electron donating groups in an excited state, leading to a lower likelihood for intermolecular interaction, inhibited non-radiative deactivation, and improved emission efficiency (paragraph 0150), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
However, Miyata does not teach nor fairly suggest that the emitting material layer comprises a second compound of Chemical Formula 7 or Chemical Formula 9.
In analogous art, Hatakeyama teaches an analogous OLED device comprising an emission layer and the emission layer comprises a boron containing compound (see paragraph 0097 and general formula (1) on page 3). Hatakeyama teaches that the described compounds comprise aromatic rings which are linked via a heteroatom, which disrupts the aromaticity, resulting in a decrease in the HOMO-LUMO gap, which allows the polycyclic aromatic compounds to be used as a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material in an organic electroluminescent element (paragraph 0011), a display apparatus, and a lighting apparatus (paragraph 0693).
Hatakeyama gives an example of the described boron containing compound in compound 1-1405 (page 36), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image5.png
236
272
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula 9 when b5 is 1 and R45 is an unsubstituted C12 heteroaryl group. Variables b1-b4 are 0 and R41-R44 are not present.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the boron compound of Hatakeyama in the emission layer of Miyata as Hatakeyama teaches it is a material suitable for use as a cohost (paragraph 0101) in an organic EL element which demonstrate a decrease in the HOMO-LUMO gap, which allows the polycyclic aromatic compounds to be used as a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material in an organic electroluminescent element (paragraph 0011), a display apparatus, and a lighting apparatus (paragraph 0693), as taught by Hatakeyama.
With respect to claim 2, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, and the first compound has the structure of Chemical Formula 4, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 3, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, and the moiety of Chemical Formula 2 has the structure of the first compound on the second row of the claim when substituted by a phenyl group.
It is examiner’s position that an indolocarbazole in which a nitrogen atom is substituted by a phenyl group is an obvious variant and that a person having ordinary skill in the art, reading the reference, would at once envisage the claimed derivative (MPEP 2131.02).
With respect to claim 4, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, as discussed above.
Miyata also teaches that in General formula A-2, Z2 is a phenyl group (optionally substituted aryl, paragraph 0108).
Such a modification produces instant compound 1-5.
Miyata includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Miyata being a lack of the aforementioned indolocarbazole, nitrogen atom, and phenyl combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a pi-conjugated compound with an electron withdrawing, nitrogen-containing aromatic six-membered ring (paragraph 0151) (A) and a plurality of electron-donating groups (D) substituted on the benzene ring in an ortho position to the electron withdrawing group, wherein the electron-donating groups can spatially resonate to stabilize the positive charge carried by the electron donating groups in an excited state, leading to a lower likelihood for intermolecular interaction, inhibited non-radiative deactivation, and improved emission efficiency (paragraph 0150), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 5, Miaya and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, as discussed above.
Hatakeyama also teaches compound (1-421) (page 33), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image6.png
382
222
media_image6.png
Greyscale
This compound is derived from Formula (2-5-1) (page 16), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
380
282
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In this formula, Hatakeyama teaches that R1-R8 and R11 are independently a hydrogen atom or an alkyl group (page 4, lines 41-42).
Adding alkyl groups to Hatakeyama compound 1-421 produces instant compound 2-1-5.
Hatakeyama includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Hatakeyama being a lack of the aforementioned alkyl groups being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound with aromatic rings which are linked via a heteroatom, which disrupts the aromaticity of the compound, resulting in a decrease in the HOMO-LUMO gap, which allows the polycyclic aromatic compounds to be used as a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material in an organic electroluminescent element (paragraph 0011), a display apparatus, and a lighting apparatus (paragraph 0693), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 6, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, as discussed above.
Compound 1-1405, pictured and discussed above, is derived from formula (2-3-1) (page 14), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image8.png
308
348
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Hatakeyama also teaches that the heteroaryl groups at B’ and C’ (the fused carbazole moieties) may be substituted by alkyl groups (paragraph 0029).
Such a modification produces instant compound 2-2-12.
Hatakeyama includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Hatakeyama being a lack of the aforementioned alkyl groups being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound with aromatic rings which are linked via a heteroatom, which disrupts the aromaticity of the compound, resulting in a decrease in the HOMO-LUMO gap, which allows the polycyclic aromatic compounds to be used as a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material in an organic electroluminescent element (paragraph 0011), a display apparatus, and a lighting apparatus (paragraph 0693), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 7, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, and Miyata also teaches that the light-emitting layer is a single layer (paragraph 0336).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compounds in a single layered light emitting layer of an organic light emitting diode, as taught by Miyata.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 7, and Miyata also teaches that the light emitting layer may further comprise a third compound (host compound, paragraph 0367), such as compound J-33 (page 144), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image9.png
242
480
media_image9.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula 11 when Y3 is represented by Chemical Formula 12, R53 and R54 are linked together to form an unsubstituted heteroring (dibenzofuran), and all other R groups are not present).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a third compound in the light emitting layer, as taught by Miyata.
With respect to claims 10-16 and 21, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, and Miyata also teaches a tandem version of the organic electroluminescent element wherein the diode comprises a first light-emitting unit, a first intermediate layer (a charge generation layer, paragraph 0327), a second light emitting layer, a second intermediate layer, and a third light-emitting unit (paragraph 0325), wherein at least one of the light emitting layers comprises the pi-conjugated compound discussed above, and each layer may further comprise a fluorescent material, such as the fluorescent compound of Hatakeyama, and a host material because the emission efficiency will be improved (paragraph 0336).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the first compound of Miyata and/or the second, fluorescent compound of Hatakeyama in any of the light emitting layers in order to obtain an organic light emitting diode with improved emission efficiency, as taught by Miyata.
With respect to claim 17, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 16, and Miyata also teaches that a combination of luminescent dopants may be used in the light emitting layers in order to produce white light and examples of dopant emission colors include blue (paragraphs 0353-0354).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a blue light emitting material layer into the tandem device of Miyata in order to obtain white light, as taught by Miyata.
With respect to claim 18, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 17, and Miyata also teaches that the charge generation layer between adjacent layers may be absent and that instead, adjacent layers may be laminated directly (paragraph 0327). Such a modification would produce a device wherein a first emitting unit is separated from the second emitting unit by a charge generation layer, wherein the second emitting unit comprises the second and third emitting layers, and at least one layer comprises the emitting material layer discussed above.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the emitting material layer of Miyata and Hatakeyama as any of the light emitting layers of the device of Miyata, as taught by Miyata.
With respect to claim 19, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 18, and Miyata also teaches that any combination of luminescent dopants may be used in the light emitting layers in order to produce white light and examples of dopant emission colors include red (paragraphs 0353-0354).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a red-light emitting material layer into the tandem device of Miyata in order to obtain white light, as taught by Miyata.
With respect to claim 22, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 1, and Miyata teaches an organic light emitting apparatus including a glass substrate (paragraph 0617), and the diode is formed on the substrate.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyata et al. (US 2018/0170914 A1) and Hatakeyama et al. (EP 3109253 A1), as applied above, and further in view of Shin et al. (US 2018/0166647 A1).
With respect to claim 20, Miyata and Hatakeyama teach the diode of claim 19, as discussed above.
However, while Miyata teaches a first, second, and third emitting layer, as discussed above, neither Miyata nor Hatakeyama teaches that the third layer, which is disposed between the first and second layer, includes a yellow-green emitting material layer.
In analogous art, Shin teaches a white LED device having a tandem structure in which there is a first emitting layer including a blue emitting layer, and a second emitting layer including a yellow-green emitting layer which are vertically laminated with a charge generation layer between the first and second emitting layers (paragraph 0007). Shin teaches that in order to obtain a white LED having long lifetime, an LED having a tandem structure with plural emitting units is widely used (paragraph 0006). Shin also teaches that use of a charge generation layer between emitting layers increases the current efficiency of each emitting layer and smoothly distributes charge to each emitting layer (paragraphs 0007-0008).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a tandem device structure with plural emitting layers, including a yellow-green emitting layer, in order to obtain a white light emitting LED having long lifetime, as taught by Shin.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0300508 A1) – teaches relevant compounds.
Jung et al. (US 2020/0131150 A1) – teaches that cyano-group containing pyridine compounds have a relatively large HOMO energy absolute value and a relatively low LUMO energy absolute value and excellent electron mobility (paragraph 0123).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M..
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.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights