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. KR10-2021-0145354, filed on 10/28/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/21/2023 was filed after the mailing date of the instant application on12/21/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
In the preliminary amendment, the claims were amended.
These amendments are hereby entered.
Claims 1-11 were originally filed.
Claim 7 is instantly amended.
Claims 1-11 are pending in the application.
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyake et al. (KR 2020/0131929 A, using the provided translation for references).
With respect to claims 1 and 3-5, Miyake discloses compound G134 (page 412 of the original document), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
288
282
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Compound G134 is derived from Miyake chemical formula 8 (page 282 of the original document), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
300
352
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In general formula 8, Miyake also teaches that the fluorenyl group at Ar2 is a substituted fluorenyl group (paragraph 0104 and 0106, see also compounds A35, A39, B36, etc. for further support).
Such a modification would produce a compound that meets the requirements of instant Chemica Formula 1 wherein l, m, n, and k are 1 and L1, L2, and L4 are a direct bond and L3 is an aryl group having 6 carbon atoms (phenylene), Ar1 is a deuterated C6 aryl (phenyl) group, Ar2 is an unsubstituted heteroaryl group having 12 carbon atoms (dibenzofuranyl), R1 and R2 are each an unsubstituted alkyl having 1 carbon atom (methyl), a is 6, b is 0, c is 0, and X1 is deuterium. This compound would have 20 hydrogen atoms and 15 deuterium atoms (42% deuteration).
Miyake includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Miyake being a lack of the aforementioned methyl substituents being explicitly used in that combination. 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 the finite list of possible substituents to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a monoamine compound with a phenylnaphthyl group which reduces the symmetry of the molecule, inhibits crystallization, improves film quality, and contributes to high efficiency (paragraph 0295), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 2, Miyake teaches the compound of claim 1, and Structure A is deuterated, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 6, Miyake teaches the compound of claim 1, as discussed above.
Miyake also teaches that m is 1 (paragraph 0086), and R1 is a phenyl group (paragraph 0083). Examiner also notes that Miyake is not limiting with respect to the bonding position of the fluorenyl and dibenzofuranyl group on the amine core.
Such a modification produces instant compound 179.
Miyake includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Miyake being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly used. 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 or bonding pattern from the finite list of possible substituents to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a monoamine compound with a phenylnaphthyl group which reduces the symmetry of the molecule, inhibits crystallization, improves film quality, and contributes to high efficiency (paragraph 0295), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claims 7-11, Miyake teaches the compound of claim 1, and Miyake also teaches an organic light emitting device comprising a first electrode (an anode, paragraph 0298), a second electrode (a cathode, paragraph 0333), an organic material layer comprising a hole transport region, and the hole transport region includes a hole transport layer and a hole auxiliary layer (a hole buffer layer) (paragraph 0300), and the hole transport region may comprise the monoamine compound (paragraph 0305), a light emitting layer (paragraph 0314) and the light emitting layer may comprise the monoamine compound (paragraph 0296), and an electron transport layer.
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 compound as a material in the hole transport layer, the hole auxiliary layer, or the light emitting layer of an organic light emitting device with the claimed structure, as taught by Miyake.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Huang et al. (CN 112979478 A) – teaches the importance of an ortho bonding pattern in relevant compounds.
Li et al. (US 2002/0076576 A1) – teaches the effect of deuterating optoelectronic materials.
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
