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
Claims 12-15 of E-J. Choi, et al., US 18/488,148 (10/17/2023) are pending and are under examination on merits.
Withdrawal Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
Rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn in view of the claim 10 has been cancelled.
Withdrawal Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Rejection of claims 1-9,12-13 and 15 under 35 U.S.C.102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by Y-J. Yu, et al, US 20220173324A1(published on 06/02/2022)(“Yu”) is withdrawn in view of claim 9 has been cancelled and the instant claim 12 has been amended with a new limitation of the structure of the Formula 2-1, which cannot be met by Yu.
Rejection of claims 12-14 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by J. Shin, et al, US 20190181354A1 (2019)(“Shin”) is withdrawn in view of the instant claim 12 has been amended with a new limitation of the structure of the Formula 2-1, which cannot be met by Shin.
Withdrawal Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Y-J. Yu, et al, US 20220173324A1 (published on 06/02/2022)(“Yu”) is withdrawn in view of the claim 11 has been cancelled.
Rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Y-J. Yu, et al, US 20220173324A1 (published on 06/02/2022)(“Yu”) in view of C-S. Kim, et al, US 20210193932A1 (published on 06/24/2021) (“Kim”) is withdrawn in view of the claim 10 has been cancelled.
Rejection of claims 1-7 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Y-J. Yu, et al, US 20220209131A1 (published on 06/30/2022)(“Yu-1”) is withdrawn in view of the claims 1-7 and 9 have been cancelled.
Withdrawal Claim Rejections - Non-Statutory Double Patenting
Rejection of claims 1-7 and 9 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, of U.S. Patent No. 12391700 B2 is withdrawn in view of the claims 1-7 and 9 have been cancelled.
Provisional rejection of claims 1, 8, 12-13 and 15 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5 and 9 of copending Application No. 19/246,985 in the claim set filed on 09/08/2025 is withdrawn in view of the terminal disclaimer filed by Applicant and approved by the USPTO on 09/03/2026 respectively.
Provisional rejection of claims 1, 8, 12-13 and 15 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5 and 7 of copending Application No. 18/973,260 in the claim set filed on 12/09/2024 is withdrawn in view of the terminal disclaimer filed by Applicant and approved by the USPTO on 09/03/2026 respectively.
Provisional rejection of claims 1, 8, 12-13 and 15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5 and 9 of copending Application No. 19/246,985in the claim set filed on 09/08/2025 is withdrawn in view of the terminal disclaimer filed by Applicant and approved by the USPTO on 09/03/2026 respectively.
New 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.
35 USC § 102 Rejection over La
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by H-J. La, et al, US20160380208A1(2016)(“La”).
La teaches compound the Chemical Formmula 1 that can be included into an organic light emitting device.
PNG
media_image1.png
351
627
media_image1.png
Greyscale
La at page 1, left col. [0007]-[0008].
La teaches example compounds of the Chemical Formmula 1 such as compound 430 having a chemical structure as indicated below. La at page 99, left second compound.
PNG
media_image2.png
543
667
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The La compound 430 maps the Formula 2-1 in claim 12 as:
each of R32-R37 is hydrogen atom,
L11 is an unsubstituted p-phenylene,
L12 is a single bond,
each of T2 and T3 is CRa, wherein, the two Ra groups link to each other forming a ring;
each of T6-T9 is CH, and
Ar22 is hydrogen atom.
Which meets each and every limitation of claim 12, therefore, claim 12 is anticipated.
35 USC § 102 Rejection over Lee
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.102(a)(1) as being anticipated by S. J. Lee, et al, KR20200064423A (2020)(“Lee”). Lee is published in Korean, a copy of machine translation is attached as a second part of the reference, which results in the full reference has a total page of 59, the format for citation of Lee is XX/69.
Lee teaches a pyrene compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1 or Chemical Formula 2, which can be included into an organic light emitting device. Lee at page 46/59, title and line 1, 3/59 for Formula 1-2.
PNG
media_image3.png
222
531
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Lee teaches example compounds of the Chemical Formula 1/2, such as compound 1-64 having a chemical structure as indicated below. Lee at 28/58, compound 1-64.
PNG
media_image4.png
285
239
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The Lee compound 1-64 maps the Formula 2-1 in claims 12-13 as:
each of R32-R37 is hydrogen atom,
L11 is a substituted o-phenylene,
L12 is a single bond,
T2 is CH and T3 is N;
each of T6-T9 is CH, and
Ar22 is hydrogen atom.
Which meets each and every limitation of claims 12-13, therefore, claims 12-13 are anticipated.
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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over S. J. Lee, et al, KR20200064423A (2020)(“Lee”).
S. J. Lee, et al, KR20200064423A (2020)(“Lee”)
Lee teaches that:
Pyrene (aromatic macrocycle) is an aromatic macrocycle (pi)-improves electron density and serves to hold the main framework of HOMO and LUMO. Therefore, it is possible to\ improve the charge mobility of the N-type charge generation layer and to smoothly transfer electrons from the N-type charge generation layer to the electron transport layer.
Lee at page 51/59, paragraph 3.
Lee teaches a pyrene compound represented by the Chemical Formula 1 or Chemical Formula 2, which can be included into an organic light emitting device. Lee at page 46/59, title and line 1, 3/59 for Formula 1-2. Lee also teaches an organic light emitting device comprising the Chemical Formula 1 or Chemical Formula 2. Lee at page 58/59-59/59, Example 1-6. Lee teaches example compounds of the Chemical Formula 1/2, such as compound 1-64 having a chemical structure as indicated below. Lee at 28/58, compound 1-64. As detail discussed in the above 102 rejection that the Lee compound meets each and every limitation of claim 12.
Difference between Lee and Claim 15
Lee differs from claim 15 in that Lee does not elect the Lee compound 1-64 and include it into an organic electroluminescent device.
Claim 15 is Obvious
One of ordinary skill in the art would have arrive at the claimed invention before the effective filling date of the instant application.
Claim 15 is obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art seeking an organic electroluminescent device is motivated to elect the Lee compound 1-64 and include it into an organic electroluminescent device such as an OLED, thus arrive at product meeting each and every limitation of claim 15, therefore, claim 15 is obvious. One of ordinary skill in the art has a motivation to do so with a reasonable expectation of success because Lee teaches that pyrene compounds can improve the charge mobility of the N-type charge generation layer and to smoothly transfer electrons from the N-type charge generation layer to the electron transport layer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 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.
As mentioned in the above 102 rejections that both Lee and La teach a compound meets each and every limitation of claim 12.
Lee or La differs from the claim 14 in that neither Lee nor La teaches the claimed species in claim 14.
Claim 14 is not obvious because neither Lee nor La provide a guidance to motivate one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior art compound(s) to arrive the claimed species.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK S. HOU whose telephone number is (571)272-1802. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30 am-2:30 pm Eastern on Monday to Friday.
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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at (571)2705241. 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.
/FRANK S. HOU/Examiner, Art Unit 1692
/ALEXANDER R PAGANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692
