DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
All outstanding objections and rejections, except for those maintained below, are withdrawn in light of applicant's amendment filed on 12/2/2025.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior office action.
The new grounds of rejection set forth below are necessitated by applicant's amendment filed on 12/2/2025. In particular, original Claims 1 and 11 have been amended to recite limitations not previously presented. Thus, the following action is properly made final.
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, 10-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 2020/0140471, cited on IDS filed on 10/21/2021).
Regarding claim 1, Chen et al discloses the following organic light emitting device (Figure 1):
PNG
media_image1.png
501
514
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
where the anode (115) corresponds to the recited first electrode; the cathode (160) corresponds to the recited second electrode; layers 150-120 correspond to the recited interlayer disposed between the anode (115) and cathode (160); and layer 135 corresponds to the recited light emitting layer ([0024]).
The light emitting layer comprises the following organometallic complex ([0002], [0015], [0090] and Page 72):
PNG
media_image2.png
500
501
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
This compound corresponds to the compound represented by Formula 1 of the claims:
PNG
media_image3.png
272
390
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
where M is Pt; ring CY1 is benzene, i.e. a C6 carbocyclic group. T1 is a single bond; T2 is -O-; X11 to X14 are C; R1 is H; and R4 is H. The bond between Y3 and M is a coordination bond; and the bond between Y1 and M is a covalent bond. A1 corresponds to Formula (1-1):
PNG
media_image4.png
156
212
media_image4.png
Greyscale
,
where c1 is two (2); b5 is three (3); and b5 + c1 = 5; Ar1 is a phenyl group substituted with five (5) R10a’s, where R10a is deuterium.
The recited ligand:
PNG
media_image5.png
192
164
media_image5.png
Greyscale
,
is represented by Formula 1C:
PNG
media_image6.png
258
242
media_image6.png
Greyscale
,
where R30c is a tert-butyl group, i.e. a C4 alkyl, and the remaining R-groups are hydrogen.
The differences between the compound disclosed by the reference and that claimed is that in the compound disclosed by the reference R4 and three (3) R5’s are hydrogen, while the claims require that each R4 is deuterium and at least one R5 is not hydrogen. However, the compound disclosed by the reference is but one embodiment and attention is directed to the following formula ([0075]):
PNG
media_image7.png
282
422
media_image7.png
Greyscale
,
where two (2) RD’s can join to form a ring and can be combination of an C2 alkenyl and deuterium ([0046] and [0064]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where R4 presents at least one (1) deuterium, i.e. the alkenyls can be fully deuterated, thereby obtaining up to four (4) deuterium atom substitutions on the fused benzene ring, and therefore, the integer b4 in Formula 1 of the claims is four (4).
Furthermore, the reference discloses that R can be a combination of deuterium and aryl ([0064]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where R is a fully deuterated aryl and therefore, the reference discloses an embodiment where b5 is three (3) and each R5 is a deuterium.
While the reference fails to exemplify the presently claimed compound nor can the claimed compound be "clearly envisaged" from the reference as required to meet the standard of anticipation, nevertheless, in light of the overlap between the claimed compound and the compound disclosed by the reference, absent a showing of criticality for the presently claimed compound, it is urged that it would have been within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art, to use the compound which is both disclosed by the reference and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, the light emitting layer comprises the disclosed organometallic complex.
Regarding claim 3, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, the light emitting layer comprises a host compound ([0091]) and the organometallic complex as a dopant ([0259]), where the amount of the organometallic complex is 10 % ([0259]). Accordingly, the amount of the host is greater than the dopant as recited in the present claims.
Regarding claim 4, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, the light emitting layer may comprise two (2) or more hosts ([0091]), i.e. the host includes different hosts as recited in the present claims.
Regarding claim 5, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, the light emitting layer may comprise a fluorescent emitter ([0087]). Accordingly, the dopant further comprises a fluorescent emitter as recited in the present claims.
Regarding claim 6, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, the reference discloses that the light emitting layer can comprise a combination of an electron transporting host and a hole transport host ([0091]). The reference discloses the following host compound:
PNG
media_image8.png
200
386
media_image8.png
Greyscale
.
This compound corresponds to the electron transport host represented by Formula 5:
PNG
media_image9.png
320
646
media_image9.png
Greyscale
,
where b52 and b53 are zero (0) and L51 and L52 are single bonds; b53 is two (2) and L53 is a C6 carbocyclic group; CY53 is C18 carbocyclic group; R53 is H; CY51 and CY52 are C6 carbocyclic groups; and R51 and R52 are H.
Furthermore, the reference discloses the following host compound: ([0092]):
PNG
media_image10.png
192
348
media_image10.png
Greyscale
.
This compound corresponds to the hole transport compound represented by Formula 7:
PNG
media_image11.png
186
356
media_image11.png
Greyscale
,
where rings CY71 and CY72 are C6 carbocyclic groups; X81 is a single bond; and R71 and R72 are hydrogen.
Regarding claim 10, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, the reference discloses a display, i.e. an electronic apparatus, comprising the disclosed organic light emitting device ([0031])
Regarding claim 11, Chen et al discloses the following organometallic complex (Page 72):
PNG
media_image2.png
500
501
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
This compound corresponds to the compound represented by Formula 1 of the claims:
PNG
media_image3.png
272
390
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
where M is Pt; ring CY1 is benzene, i.e. a C6 carbocyclic group. T1 is a single bond; T2 is -O-; X11 to X14 are C; R1 is H; and R4 is H. The bond between Y3 and M is a coordination bond; and the bond between Y1 and M is a covalent bond. A1 corresponds to Formula (1-1):
PNG
media_image4.png
156
212
media_image4.png
Greyscale
,
where c1 is two (2); b5 is three (3); and b5 + c1 = 5; Ar1 is a phenyl group substituted with five (5) R10a’s, where R10a is deuterium.
The recited ligand:
PNG
media_image5.png
192
164
media_image5.png
Greyscale
,
is represented by Formula 1C:
PNG
media_image6.png
258
242
media_image6.png
Greyscale
,
where R30c is a tert-butyl group, i.e. a C4 alkyl, and the remaining R-groups are hydrogen.
The differences between the compound disclosed by the reference and that claimed is that in the compound disclosed by the reference R4 and three (3) R5’s are hydrogen, while the claims require that each R4 is deuterium and at least one R5 is not hydrogen. However, the compound disclosed by the reference is but one embodiment and attention is directed to the following formula ([0075]):
PNG
media_image7.png
282
422
media_image7.png
Greyscale
,
where two (2) RD’s can join to form a ring and can be combination of an C2 alkenyl and deuterium ([0046] and [0064]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where R4 presents at least one (1) deuterium, i.e. the alkenyls can be fully deuterated, thereby obtaining up to four (4) deuterium atom substitutions on the fused benzene ring, and therefore, the integer b4 in Formula 1 of the claims is four (4).
Furthermore, the reference discloses that R can be a combination of deuterium and aryl ([0064]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where R is a fully deuterated aryl and therefore, the reference discloses an embodiment where b5 is three (3) and each R5 is a deuterium.
While the reference fails to exemplify the presently claimed compound nor can the claimed compound be "clearly envisaged" from the reference as required to meet the standard of anticipation, nevertheless, in light of the overlap between the claimed compound and the compound disclosed by the reference, absent a showing of criticality for the presently claimed compound, it is urged that it would have been within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art, to use the compound which is both disclosed by the reference and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 12, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, M is Pt.
Regarding claim 13, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, the reference discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image12.png
500
501
media_image12.png
Greyscale
.
In this compound CY1 corresponds to Formula CY1-1:
PNG
media_image13.png
124
172
media_image13.png
Greyscale
,
where Y1 is C; v11 to v13 are C; and R1a is hydrogen.
Regarding claim 14, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, in the compound of the reference Formula 1-1 is:
PNG
media_image14.png
277
429
media_image14.png
Greyscale
,
corresponding to Formula 1-1-1 of the claims:
PNG
media_image15.png
220
240
media_image15.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 15, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, in the compound of the reference Formula 1-1 is:
PNG
media_image14.png
277
429
media_image14.png
Greyscale
,
three (3) R5’s are deuterium.
Regarding claim 16, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, R1 and R2 are H; R30c is a tert-butyl group, i.e. a C4 alkyl; and R30a, R30b, R30d, and R20a to R20f are H.
Regarding claim 17, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, the reference discloses a compound where at least one recited group R4 is deuterium. In the compound disclosed by the reference R1 in Formula 1 is hydrogen and not deuterium as required by provision (i) of the claims. However, in the formula:
PNG
media_image7.png
282
422
media_image7.png
Greyscale
,
the reference discloses that RC can be deuterium ([0064]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses provision (i) of the claims, i.e. at least one R1 is deuterium.
Regarding claim 18, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. From the discussion above, the ligand:
PNG
media_image16.png
288
230
media_image16.png
Greyscale
is represented by Formula 1A:
PNG
media_image17.png
436
320
media_image17.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 20, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. From the discussion above, the reference discloses Compound BD6 of the claims:
PNG
media_image18.png
308
340
media_image18.png
Greyscale
.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 2020/0140471, cited on IDS filed on 10/21/2021) as applied to claims 1-6, 10-18, and 20 above, and in view of Ahn et al (US 2019/0085001, hereafter Ahn ‘001) and Ahn et al (US 2018/0269404, hereafter Ahn ‘404).
The discussion with respect to Chen et al as set forth in Paragraph 6 above is incorporated here by reference.
Regarding claim 7, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. While the reference discloses that the light emitting layer comprises hole transporting and electron transporting host compounds, the reference does not disclose that the light emitting layer comprises the particular electron transport host recited in the present claims.
Ahn ‘001 discloses an organic light emitting device comprising, where the light emitting layer comprises the following host compound (Abstract [0033]-[0034], and Page 5 – Compound 9):
PNG
media_image19.png
318
362
media_image19.png
Greyscale
,
corresponding to the electron transport host represented by Compound ETH26 of the claims.
The reference discloses that organic light emitting devices comprising the disclosed compound have a high efficiency, improved emission efficiency, improved external quantum efficiency and long life ([0007] and [0081]-[0082]).
Given that both Chen et al and Ahn ‘001 are drawn to organic light emitting devices where the light emitting layer comprises electron transport hosts, and in light of the particular advantages provided by the use and control of the particular electron transport host as taught by Ahn ‘001, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include such electron transport hosts in the light emitting layer of the device disclosed by Chen et al in order to obtain an organic light emitting device with improved emission efficiency, improved external quantum efficiency and long life with a reasonable expectation of success.
The combined disclosures of Chen et al and Ahn ‘001 teach all the claim limitations as set forth above. As discussed above, while Chen et al discloses that the light emitting layer comprises a hole transporting host compound, the reference does not disclose the particular hole transporting host compounds recited in the present claims.
Ahn ‘404 discloses an organic light emitting device, where the light emitting layer comprises the following host compound (Abstract, [0123], and Page 13 – Compound 1):
PNG
media_image20.png
198
256
media_image20.png
Greyscale
,
identical to the hole transporting compound represented by Compound HTH15. The compound has hole transporting ability, which increases exciton formation efficiency in the emission layer of the organic light emitting device thereby resulting in a lower driving voltage and high efficiency ([0123]).
Given that both Chen et al and Ahn ‘404 are drawn to organic light emitting devices where the light emitting layer comprises hole transport hosts, and in light of the particular advantages provided by the use and control of the particular hole transport host as taught by Ahn ‘404, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include such electron transport hosts in the light emitting layer of the device disclosed by Chen et al in order to obtain an organic light emitting device possessing a lower driving voltage and high efficiency with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 2020/0140471, cited on IDS filed on 10/21/2021) as applied to claims 1-6, 10-18, and 20 above, and in view of Hatakeyama et al (US 2020/0190115).
The discussion with respect to Chen et al as set forth in Paragraph 6 above is incorporated here by reference.
Regarding claim 8, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. However, the reference discloses that the light emitting layer comprises a fluorescent emitter, the reference does not disclose a fluorescent emitter represented by Formula 4 of the present claims.
Hatakeyama et al discloses an organic light emitting device, where the light emitting layer comprises the following compound ([0245] and [0054] – Compound 1-1A):
PNG
media_image21.png
306
580
media_image21.png
Greyscale
.
This compound corresponds to the compound represented by Formula 4 of the claims:
PNG
media_image22.png
214
386
media_image22.png
Greyscale
,
where Y41 and Y42 are B; X41 and X42 are NR41a and NR42a, respectively, where R41a and R42a are phenyl groups, i.e. C6 carbocyclic groups; X43 is NR43a and X44 is NR44a, where R43a and R44a are phenyl groups, i.e. C6 carbocyclic groups; R47, and R48 are H; and R45 and R46 are -NQ1Q2, where Q1 and Q2 are phenyl groups, i.e. C6 carbocyclic groups. The reference discloses that the use of this compound results in an excellent organic light emitting device can be obtained ([0022])
Given that both Chen et al and Hatakeyama et al are drawn to organic light emitting device where the light emitting layer utilizes fluorescent dopant compounds, in light of the particular advantages provided by the use and control of the particular fluorescent dopant compound as taught by Hatakeyama et al, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include such fluorescent dopants in the light emitting layer of the device disclosed by Chen et al with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 9, Chen et al teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. However, the reference discloses that the light emitting layer comprises a fluorescent emitter, the reference does not disclose a fluorescent emitter represented by Formula 4 of the present claims.
Hatakeyama et al discloses an organic light emitting device, where the light emitting layer comprises the following compound ([0245] and [0054] – Compound 1-1A):
PNG
media_image21.png
306
580
media_image21.png
Greyscale
,
corresponding to Compound DFD1 of the claims. The reference discloses that the use of this compound results in an excellent organic light emitting device can be obtained ([0022])
Given that both Chen et al and Hatakeyama et al are drawn to organic light emitting device where the light emitting layer utilizes fluorescent dopant compounds, in light of the particular advantages provided by the use and control of the particular fluorescent dopant compound as taught by Hatakeyama et al, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include such fluorescent dopants in the light emitting layer of the device disclosed by Chen et al with a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In light of the amendments to the claims, the 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) rejection set forth in the previous Office Action is withdrawn.
Applicants argue that Chen does not teach the claimed organometallic compound represented by Formula 1 which has Formula 1-1. However, as discussed in the rejections above, in the compound disclosed by the reference:
PNG
media_image2.png
500
501
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
ring A1 can be a combination of deuterium and an aryl group. That is, in the general formula below:
PNG
media_image7.png
282
422
media_image7.png
Greyscale
,
the reference discloses that R can be a combination of deuterium and aryl ([0064]). Accordingly, the disclosure of the reference encompasses an embodiment where R is a fully deuterated aryl and therefore, the reference discloses an embodiment where b5 is three (3) and each R5 is a deuterium.
As evidence of unexpected results, Applicants point to Comparative Example 4 utilizing Compound D and compare this example to Inventive Examples 1 to 8 presented on in Table 2 (Pages 161-162 of the as-filed Specification). However, the data presented in the Specification is not found to be persuasive for the reasons discussed below.
Comparative Example 4 utilizes Comparative Compound D:
PNG
media_image23.png
238
268
media_image23.png
Greyscale
,
and a 3:7 ratio of the electron transporting host ETH1 and the hole transporting host HTH30.
Inventive Examples 1 to 8 utilize Compounds BD1, BD2, BD5, BD31, BD32, and BD35 and combinations of different hole and electron transporting host compounds. Only Inventive Example 1 utilizes that same hole and electron transporting host compounds found in the comparative example. Inventive Examples 2 – 8 utilize ETH2 and HTH30 as the electron and hole transporting hosts, respectively, and therefore, these inventive examples are not properly side-by-side comparable to Comparative Example 4.
Inventive Example 1 utilizes the compound BD1:
PNG
media_image24.png
346
360
media_image24.png
Greyscale
.
However, this comparison is not a proper side-by-side comparison to the comparative example given that the comparative compound:
PNG
media_image23.png
238
268
media_image23.png
Greyscale
,
does not possess any deuterium atoms on either the phenyl ring or the benzene of the imidazole group; the inventive example possesses a single deuterium on the phenyl group and four (4) deuterium atoms on the benzene of the imidazole ring. A proper side-by-side comparison would be one where the comparative and inventive compounds are identical in all but one aspect, and in the present case, the comparative and inventive compounds differ in more than one aspect.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER C. KOLLIAS whose telephone number is (571)-270-3869. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00AM – 5:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEXANDER C KOLLIAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786