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
Response to Arguments
Applicants arguments and amendments filed on 11/12/25, have been fully considered but they do not confer patentability on all of the instantly filed claims. Applicants have amended independent claims 1 and 11 to exclude specific compounds from chemical formula 7 and chemical formula 3. However, these amendments do not confer patentability on all of the instantly filed claims. Kim et al. (WO 2018/221871), which was relied upon as an obviousness type reference in the previous Office action, may still be relied upon to render obvious some of Applicants instantly filed claims, as described below.
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.
Claims 11, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Independent claim 11 has been amended such that the compounds of chemical formula 3 excludes the compounds D02 through D05, D10, D22, and D23, whose structures are shown in claim 11. However, claim 11 requires that at least one of X1-X3 of chemical formula 3 is a group satisfying chemical formula 3-3, which is comprises a spirobifluorenyl moiety. The compounds which are excluded from chemical formula 3 do not read on chemical formula 3-3, which raises the question as to what Applicants are trying to claim. For purposes of further examination, claim 11 will be interpreted as a device wherein at least one of X1-X3 in the compounds of chemical formula 3 must comprise at least one group satisfying chemical formula 3-3. As such, Applicants should cancel the newly added claim language directed to the exclusion of compounds D02-D05, D10, D22, and D23 to overcome this rejection. Claims 16 and 17 are included with this rejection as they are dependent on claim 11.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Compound D25 does not further limit claim 1, from which it directly depends. Claim 1 requires that the compound according to chemical formula 3 must have at least one of X1 through X3 equal to a group satisfying chemical formula 3-2, which comprises a 9,9-diphenyl substituted fluorenyl group. Compound D25 does not comprise such a group. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 6, 8-11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (WO 2018/221871, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 4/22/24). The English language equivalent US 2020/0144552 will be relied upon for citation purposes.
Claim 1: Kim et al. teaches organic light emitting elements which comprises a charge generation layer comprising a p-type charge generation layer, where the p-type charge generation layer is comprised of a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 and one or more compounds represented by Chemical Formulae 2, 3, and 4 (claims 1 and 2 of Kim et al.). The compounds represented by Chemical Formula 1 include those specific compounds taught in paragraph 0160 (pages 11-29). Of these compounds taught in paragraph 0160, the first 46 compounds satisfy all of the structural limitations of chemical formula 7 as recited in claim 1 (minus the three compounds A01, A25, and A44 as excluded in claim 1). All of the first 46 compounds in paragraph 0160 have a symmetric molecular structure, all have two malonitrile groups in a cis-configuration as shown in chemical formula 7, and at least one of R1 through R6 is a cyano group. Further, all remaining R1 through R6 groups in the first 46 compounds which are not cyano are equal to hydrogen, -F, -CF3, -OCF3, unsubstituted phenyl groups, phenyl groups substituted with -F, -CF3, and -OCF3, pyridine, and pyrimidine groups. The selection of any one of these first 46 explicitly taught compounds as the first compound according to Kim et al. is prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding the compounds of chemical formulae 2 to 4 of Kim et al., there are several compounds which satisfy all of the structural limitations of chemical formula 3 as recited in independent claim 1. These include many of the compounds taught in paragraph 0162 of Kim et al. which are compounds satisfying chemical formula 3 as taught therein and nearly all of the compounds taught in paragraph 0163 of Kim et al. which hare compounds satisfying chemical formula 4 as taught therein. Given that a significant number of the explicitly taught compounds of chemical formula 1 of Kim et al. satisfy all of the structural limitations of chemical formula 7 of claim 1 as well as a number of compounds of chemical formulae 3 and 4 of Kim et al. satisfy all of the structural limitations of chemical formula 3 of claim 1, it necessarily follows that one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it prima facie obvious to prepare an organic electroluminescent device where the p-type charge transport layer includes a first compound satisfying chemical formula 7 and a second compound satisfying chemical formula 3 of claim 1.
Claim 6: Compound A13 of claim 6 is the same compound as the 3rd compound taught on the left column of page 12 of Kim et al. Embodiments where this compound is selected as the compound satisfying chemical formula 7 satisfies the limitations of claim 6.
Claim 8: While Kim et al. does not explicitly teach that the limitations of general formula 1 of claim 8 is satisfied, the preparation of an organic electric element comprising a first compound satisfying chemical formula 7 and a second compound satisfying chemical formula 3 would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art based on the overall teachings of Kim et al. Because embodiments are taught by Kim et al. where all of the structural limitations of claim 1 are satisfied, it would follow that said devices would be expected to satisfy the physical property requirement of claim 8. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable.
Claims 9 and 10: The organic electric elements taught by Kim et al. all include a light-emitting layer comprising a third compound. The exemplified third compound employed by Kim et al. is [BH] whose structure is substantially similar to ADN as employed by Applicants. Because of this, it would be expected that general formulae 2 and 3 of claims 9 and 10 would be satisfied in the devices taught by Kim et al.; particularly those devices which satisfy all of Applicants limitations regarding chemical formula 3 and chemical formula 7.
Claims 11 and 16: Kim et al. teaches organic light emitting elements which comprises a charge generation layer comprising a p-type charge generation layer, where the p-type charge generation layer is comprised of a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 and one or more compounds represented by Chemical Formulae 2, 3, and 4 (claims 1 and 2 of Kim et al.). The compounds represented by Chemical Formula 1 include those specific compounds taught in paragraph 0160 (pages 11-29). Of these compounds taught in paragraph 0160, the first 46 compounds satisfy all of the structural limitations of chemical formula 7 as recited in claim 1 (minus the three compounds A01, A25, and A44 as excluded in claim 11). All of the first 46 compounds in paragraph 0160 have a symmetric molecular structure, all have two malonitrile groups in a cis-configuration as shown in chemical formula 7, and at least one of R1 through R6 is a cyano group. Further, all remaining R1 through R6 groups in the first 46 compounds which are not cyano are equal to hydrogen, -F, -CF3, -OCF3, unsubstituted phenyl groups, phenyl groups substituted with -F, -CF3, and -OCF3, pyridine, and pyrimidine groups. The selection of any one of these first 46 explicitly taught compounds as the first compound according to Kim et al. is prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art.
Kim et al. teaches that the second compound is selected from one which satisfies chemical 2 through 4. The selection of any one of the explicitly taught compounds of chemical formula 2 through 4 would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. This includes compounds which satisfy chemical formula 3 of claim 11 such as the compound
PNG
media_image1.png
150
224
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(top left of page 107). This compound represents one of many compounds taught by Kim et al. which satisfies chemical formula 3 of claim 11. Embodiments where a compound satisfying chemical formula 7 and a compound satisfying chemical formula 3 are employed in an organic electroluminescent device in the manner taught in the examples of Kim et al., would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Kim et al. explicitly teaches that the charge generation layer includes a first compound satisfying chemical formula 1 and one of a second compound satisfying one of chemical formulae 2-4 (paragraph 0026). The selection of a first compound satisfying Applicants claimed first compound and a second compound satisfying Applicants claimed second compound of claim 11 is obvious embodiments given the overall teachings of Kim et al. This includes embodiments where a first compound satisfying chemical formula 7 of claim 11 and a second compound satisfying chemical formula 3 of claim 11 such as when employing the compound shown above as the second compound. As applied to claim 11, the above compound has one of variables X1 to X3 equal to a group satisfying chemical formula 3-3 with variable n equal to a single bond, a different one of variables X1 to X3 equal to a phenyl group, and a different one of variables X1 to X3 equal to a heteroaryl group. A device comprising a p-type charge generation layer comprising the compound shown above as the second compound of claim 11 and one of the first 46 compounds taught in paragraph 0160 of Kim et al. (minus the three compounds A01, A25, and A44 as excluded in claim 11) as the first compound of claim 11 satisfies all of the structural and device limitations of claim 11.
Claim 16: Compound A13 of claim 16 is the same compound as the 3rd compound taught on the left column of page 12 of Kim et al. Embodiments where this compound is selected as the compound satisfying chemical formula 7 satisfies the limitations of claim 16.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 ROBERT S LOEWE whose telephone number is (571)270-3298. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Robert S Loewe/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766