Ex Parte Lemaitre et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardDec 16, 2014

12374881 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 16, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ________________ Ex parte NOELLA LEMAITRE, BERNARD GEFFROY, OMRANE FADHEL, MURIAL HISSLER, and REGIS REAU ________________ Appeal 2013-001997 Application 12/374,881 Technology Center 1700 ________________ Before TERRY J. OWENS, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judges. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). The Invention The Appellants claim a white electroluminescent organic diode. Claim 1 is as follows: 1. A white electroluminescent organic diode, providing, under an effect of an electrical polarization, a white light composed of a mixture of at least one first color and a second color emitted respectively by a first phosphorous material and by a second phosphorous material, wherein at least one of the first phosphorous material and the second phosphorous material is the following phosphole-based material App App and i (l-na Hatw Heil char PHOT Orga Elec (here Heil 1 Ou June equiv eal 2013-0 lication 12 s present a phthyl)-N ar 1 Shun-Li ge-transfe OBIOL. A: Hai-Chin nophosph trolumines inafter Su Claim 1 , Su, and W We reve r considera 19, 2008, alent of H 01997 /374,881 s a dopan ,N'-diphen Wang & T r behaviou CHEMISTR g Su et al orus Mate cent Devic ). stands reje ang. rse the reje tion of He which the eil (Ans. t of a hole yl-l,1'-biph The US WO ong-Ing H r of styryl Y 119–26 ., Toward rials: Des es, 128 J. The cted unde O ction. il is based Examiner 2–3). 2 transport l enyl-4,4'- References 6,696,177 2006/000 o, Substit heterocycl (2000) (h Functiona ign of Pho AM. CHEM Rejection r 35 U.S.C PINION upon US relies upo ayer made diamine). B1 389 A1 uent effect es, 135 J. ereinafter l π-Conjug sphole-Ba . SOC. 983 . § 103 ov 2008/0145 n as an En of NPB ( Feb. 24, Jan. 5, 2 s on intra PHOTOCHE Wang). ated sed Oligom –95 (2006 er Hatwar 698 A1, p glish lang N,N'-bis- 2004 006 molecular M. & ers for ) in view o ublished uage f Appeal 2013-001997 Application 12/374,881 3 The Appellants’ claim 1 requires that at least one of a first and second phosphorus material is a phosphole-based material having the recited formula. To meet that claim requirement the Examiner relies upon the combination of Su and Wang (Ans. 3–4). Su discloses bis(2-thienyl)thiooxophosphole (p. 986, Scheme 1, 7b). That phosphole differs from the Appellants’ phosphole in that each of its thienyl substituents lacks the Appellants’ methyl group. Wang reports absorption and emission maxima for 2-styrylthiophene derivatives in methanol, one of which has a methyl substitutent (pp. 121–22, § 3.3, Table 3). The Examiner argues that “[a]lthough the compounds of Wang are not phosphole, they are analogous compounds and show the well-known concept that adding electron donating groups to a compound leads to a red shift in the emission spectra” (Ans. 5), “it is well-known in the art and supported by Su that it is desirable to fine tune chemical compounds by changing the chemical structure to obtain the desired emission color,” id., and “[g]iven that it is well known in the art and further supported by Wang that changing hydrogen atoms to methyl groups, making a substituent more electron donating, one can red shift the emission spectra, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify compound 7b so the hydrogen atoms were changed to methyl groups” (Ans. 5–6). Even if one of ordinary skill in the art would have desired to red shift the color of Su’s bis(2-thienyl)thiooxophosphole, the Examiner has not addressed the differences between that compound and Wang’s 2-styryl thiophene and explained why, regardless of those differences, Wang’s disclosure of a methyl group red shifting 2-styryl thiophene would have Appeal 2013-001997 Application 12/374,881 4 indicated to one of ordinary skill in the art that a methyl group would red shift Su’s bis(2-thienyl)thiooxophosphole. The Examiner has provided mere speculation that it was well known in the art that methyl groups red shift compounds generally, and such speculation is not a sufficient basis for a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017 (CCPA 1967); In re Sporck, 301 F.2d 686, 690 (CCPA 1962). Accordingly, we reverse the rejection. DECISION/ORDER The rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Hatwar in view of Heil, Su and Wang is reversed. It is ordered that the Examiner’s decision is reversed. REVERSED cdc