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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/16/2026 has been entered.
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 1-2, 7-9 and 14-22 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitations below.
PNG
media_image1.png
192
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For example, the device already requires the presence of an anode and a cathode, and this additional limitation requires an anode electrode and an apparently optional cathode electrode. It is unclear if these are in addition to the anode and cathode required on lines 1-2 of the claim. Similarly, the claim also requires an emission layer in like 2 of this recitation but then further lists optionally “an emission layer”. It is unclear if this is an additional emission layer.
Further it is unclear which layer is optional as multiple layers appear after the word optionally. For the purpose of the application of prior art it will be assumed that only “a hole generation layer” is optional.
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 1-2, 7-8, 14-15 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (KR 2009-0011488) (Lee) in view of Cha et al (US 2017/0365787) (Cha) and further in view of Hartmann et al (US 2008/0265216) (Hartmann).
In reference to claim 1-2, 7-8 and 21, Lee teaches spiro compounds of formula (1) as shown below for use in an organic electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a cathode, and a light emitting layer, a hole transport and hole injection layer and an electron transport layer among other layers wherein the compound is included in the electron transport layer or electron injection layer
PNG
media_image2.png
335
460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
For example wherein Sp is carbon, Ri is an annular structure such as a fluorenyl group that is substituted by a phenyl substituted with a substituted heterocyclic group (as in examples), R1 to R3 are each hydrogen (Lee [0009] [0035] [0016]).
Lee discloses the compound of formula 1 that encompasses the presently claimed compound, including wherein Sp is carbon, Ri is an annular structure such as a fluorenyl group that is substituted by a phenyl substituted with a substituted heterocyclic group (as in examples), R1 to R3 are each hydrogen. Each of the disclosed substituents from the substituent groups of Lee are considered functionally equivalent and their selection would lead to obvious variants of the compound of formula 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application, in the absence of unexpected results, to have selected these substituents among those disclosed for the compound of formula 1 to provide the compound described above, which is both disclosed by Lee and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Lee teaches that the heterocyclic group can be a variety of groups comprising 5 to 50 atoms and includes some specific examples including electron transport moieties such as pyridine, pyrimidine, quinoline, and isoquinoline groups but does exemplify a triazine group.
With respect to the difference, Cha teaches, in analogous art, similar spiro compounds for use in an electron transport layer (Cha [0205]) of an organic electronic device and that heterocyclic substituents in these materials are preferably selected from triazine, pyrimidine, pyridine, quinoline, isoquinoline etc. (Cha [0177]).
That is, the substitution of the a triazine of Cha for the heterocyclic group of Lee, absent unexpected results, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application with the predictable result of providing an electron transporting material. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (See MPEP § 2143, B).
Furthermore, it is noted that compounds which are position isomers (compounds having the same radicals in physically different positions on the same nucleus) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. In re Wilder, 563 F.2d 457, 195 USPQ 426 (CCPA 1977). See also In re May, 574 F.2d 1082, 197 USPQ 601 (CCPA 1978) (stereoisomers prima facie obvious). In light of the case law cited above, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the compound disclosed in the present claims is but an obvious variant of the compound presently claimed, and thereby one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention.
Lee further teaches that these compounds have excellent thermal evaporation properties, high solubility in organic solvents, high yield of wet tablets and wet film formation such as inkjet or spin coating and that the device comprising this has excellent heat resistance, high stability of the thin film constituting the device, long life, high color purity and luminous efficiency and low voltage driving.
While Lee does not exemplify a device with this specific configuration, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have prepared a device with the compound of Lee in view of Cha with a typical device configuration as described therein with the anticipation of preparing a device comparably effective as those in the examples of Lee.
Lee in view of Cha does not expressly teach that the hole injection or transport layers comprise radialene or quinodomethane compounds as instantly claimed. However, these are well known classes of materials commonly used in charge transport layers of such devices (i.e. p-type dopants in hole transporting layers).
With respect to the difference, Hartmann teaches, in analogous art, radialene derivatives such as the compound 5 shown below (Hartmann [0012]) for use as dopants in organic semiconductors in charge injection layers and that the use of these materials in charge injection layers improves charge carrier injection providing improved efficiency and long-time stability (Hartmann e.g. [0007] [0052]).
PNG
media_image3.png
178
320
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In light of the motivation of using the compound 5 as described above, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the compound 5 as described by Hartmann in order to improve efficiency and stability and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
For Claim 1: Reads on a device of the claimed structure wherein compound 30 is the compound of formula I wherein a is 1, A is phenylene and L is a substituted triazine.
For Claim 2: Reads on wherein A is phenylene.
For Claim 7: Reads on wherein L is substituted by a phenyl.
For Claim 8: Reads on wherein the layer consists of the compound.
For Claim 21: Reads on formula XX wherein R1 to R6 are each nitrile.
In reference to claim 22, the claim further limits the quinodimethane), which are optional embodiments of claim 1 (i.e. text from claim radialene or quinodimethane) and therefore not required. As such, claim 16 is rejected based on similar reasons to claim 1.
In reference to claim 14-15, Lee in view of Cha and Hartmann teaches an organic electroluminescence device as described above for claim 1 and further teaches that the device can be used in a display or lighting device (Lee [0007]).
It would have been obvious to the ordinarily trained artisan to have used the device in the taught application as described by Lee despite Lee not exemplifying such a device in the disclosure.
Claim 9 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Cha and Hartmann as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Song et al (US 2009/0128012) (Song).
In reference to claim 9 and 16-20, Lee in view of Cha and Hartmann teaches the device as described above for claim 1. Lee does not specifically teach that the electron transport layer further includes a dopant.
With respect to the difference, Song teaches in related art, an electron transport layer that is doped with a metal compound, such as a lithium quinolate as described therein and further teaches that when such a device is included in the device the device has improved driving voltage, efficiency and lifetime and lower power consumption (Song [0009]-[0010] [0031]).
In light of the motivation of using the metal compound in the electron transport layer as described above, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the metal compound as described by Song in order to improve driving voltage, efficiency and lifetime, and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean M DeGuire whose telephone number is (571)270-1027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 A. Boyd can be reached on (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.
/Sean M DeGuire/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights