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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: (a) misplaced punctuation, as there is a period after “(2)” in line 4, and there is a closed parentheses after the period in the ultimate line, and (b) unnecessary open/closed parentheses as respectively recited in “(R1 to R12” and “and a trifluoromethyl group.)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: misplaced punctuation, as there is a period after “(1-1)” in line 2, and the absence of punctuation, i.e., a missing period in the ultimate line, i.e., after the formula.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: misplaced punctuation, as there is a period after “(2-1)” in line 2, and the absence of punctuation, i.e., a missing period in the ultimate line, i.e., after the formula.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: (a) misplaced punctuation, as there is a period after “(2)” in line 7, and there is a closed parentheses after the period in the ultimate line, and (b) unnecessary open/closed parentheses as respectively recited in “(R1 to R12” and “and a trifluoromethyl group.)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 18 are rejected as being vague and indefinite when they each recite “the organic semiconductor material having a crystal density of greater than 1.26 g/cm3 and less than 1.50 g/cm3 in powder form by X-ray structure analysis, and a molecular weight of 1200 or less, and being available for vacuum deposition film formation” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “being available for” is not clear. Regarding claims 1 and 18, the phrase "being available for" renders the claims indefinite because the claims include organic semiconductor materials not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "being available for vacuum deposition film formation"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claim 1 and 18 each fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 2 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “benzodithiophene derivative represented by the following general formula (1) or a naphthodithiophene derivative represented by the following general formula (2). [Chem. 1]” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by and antecedent basis of “[Chem. 1]” is not clear. Claim 2 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claims 2 and 20 are rejected as being vague and indefinite when they each recites “******** (1)” and “ ******** (2)”; the scope of the protection sought by “********” is not clear. Claims 2 and 20 each fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 2 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites the structural formulae (1) and (2); the scope of the protection sought is not clear as the claim does not define any of the substituents R1 through R12 therein formulae (1) and (2). Claim 2 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the compounds of formula (1) or (2) contained in the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 2 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “R1 to R12 are each independently” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “R1 to R12” is not clear as there is insufficient antecedent basis therein formulae (1) and (2) for any of “R1 through R12”. Claim 2 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected as being vague and indefinite when they each recite “a broad peak with a half width of greater than 1° in a case where an organic film formed using powder thereof by a vacuum deposition method is subjected to X-ray diffraction measurement with use of CuKα radiation” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “in a case” is not clear. Claims 3 and 13 each fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 4 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein the benzodithiophene derivative comprises a compound represented by the following formula (1-1). [Chem. 2]” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by and antecedent basis of “[Chem. 2]” is not clear. Claim 4 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 4 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “******** (1-1)”; the scope of the protection sought by “********” is not clear. Claim 4 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 5 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein the naphthodithiophene derivative comprises a compound represented by the following formula (2-1). [Chem. 3]” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by and antecedent basis of “[Chem. 3]” is not clear. Claim 5 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 5 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “******** (2-1)”; the scope of the protection sought by “********” is not clear. Claim 5 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 6 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein the organic semiconductor layer includes a single material of the benzodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (1) or the naphthodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (2)” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “a single material” is not clear. Claim 6 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 7 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein the organic semiconductor layer includes a single material of the benzodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (1-1) or the naphthodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (2-1)” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “a single material” is not clear. Claim 7 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 7 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites each of “******** (1-1)” and “ ******** (2-1)”; the scope of the protection sought by “********” is not clear. Claim 7 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 10 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein the organic semiconductor layer comprises a light-emitting layer, and includes the benzodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (1) or the naphthodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (2)” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “and includes” is not clear, especially since claim 1 recites that the organic semiconductor layer includes an organic semiconductor material. Claim 10 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element. Is it applicant’s intention to further limit the organic semiconductor layer as a light-emitting layer?
Claim 12 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein the organic semiconductor layer comprises a carrier transport layer or a carrier blocking layer, and includes a compound represented by the general formula (1-1) or a compound represented by the general formula (2-1)” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by “and includes” is not clear, especially since claim 7 recites that the organic semiconductor layer is formed from “a benzodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (1-1) or a naphthodithiophene derivative represented by the general formula (2-1)”. Claim 12 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element. Is it applicant’s intention to further limit the organic semiconductor layer as a carrier transport layer or a carrier blocking layer?
Claim 16 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “wherein a difference between a Highest Occupied Molecular Orbital level of a material included in the photoelectric conversion layer and a Highest Occupied Molecular Orbital level of a material included in the organic semiconductor layer is within a range of ±0.4 eV” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by and antecedent basis of each of “a material included in the photoelectric conversion layer” and “a material included in the organic semiconductor layer” is not clear. Claim 16 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Claim 20 is rejected as being vague and indefinite when it recites “benzodithiophene derivative represented by the following general formula (1) or a naphthodithiophene derivative represented by the following general formula (2). [Chem. 5]” (emphasis added); the scope of the protection sought by and antecedent basis of “[Chem. 5]” is not clear. Claim 20 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the contents of the claimed semiconductor element.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims rewritten or amended to overcome each of the objections and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action, AND limited to comprising a compound of the following formula (1) or a compound of the following formula (2) would be allowable:
PNG
media_image1.png
453
422
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
248
423
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0292641, which is the pre-grant publication corresponding to the present application, and Chinese Patent No. CN 114907361 A, which is pertinent to applicant’s naphthodithiophene compound of formula (2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Geraldina Visconti whose telephone number is (571)272-1334. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Anthony J Zimmer can be reached at (571)270-3591. 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.
GERALDINA VISCONTI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1737
/GERALDINA VISCONTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
Prosecution Insights