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 .
Examiner’s Note
There was a typographical error in the section 159, on page 33 of the last Office Action of 09/19/2025. The reference “Suzuki et al. (US 2014/0091293 A1)” is incorrect and should be replaced by “Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1)”.
Response to Amendment
The amendment of 01/20/2026 has been entered.
Disposition of claims:
Claims 1-21 are pending.
Claims 1, 4, and 6 have been amended.
The amendments of claims 1, 4, and 6 have overcome:
the rejections of claims 1-13 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2014/0091293 A1, hereafter Suzuki) in view of Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1, hereafter Arasawa), Osaka et al. (US 2017/0365782 A1, hereafter Osaka), Ossila et al. (Materials information of F4-TCNQ captured by the Wayback Machine on 07/07/2017, https://web.archive.org/web/20170707152859/https://www.ossila.com/products/f4tcnq, hereafter Ossila), and Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1, hereafter Lee), as evidenced by Seo et al. (US 2012/0286252 A1, hereafter Seo ‘252),
the rejections of claims 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2014/0091293 A1) in view of Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1), Osaka et al. (US 2017/0365782 A1), Ossila et al. (Materials information of F4-TCNQ captured by the Wayback Machine on 07/07/2017, https://web.archive.org/web/20170707152859/https://www.ossila.com/products/f4tcnq), and Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1) as applied to claims 1-13 and 16-21 above, further in view of Seo et al. (US 2002/0121860 A1, hereafter Seo ‘860), as evidenced by Sung et al. (US 2013/0153903 A1, hereafter Sung),
the rejections of claims 1-13 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1), as evidenced by Seo et al. (US 2012/0286252 A1), and
the rejections of claims 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1) as applied to claims 1-13 and 16-21 above, further in view of Seo et al. (US 2002/0121860 A1), as evidenced by Osaka et al. (US 2017/0365782 A1) set forth in the last Office Action.
The rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments see page 8-10 of the reply filed 01/20/2026 regarding the rejections of claims 1-13 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki/Arasawa/Osaka/Ossila/Lee/Seo ‘252, the rejections of claims 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki/Arasawa/Osaka/Ossila/Lee/Seo ‘860/Sung set forth in the Office Action of 09/19/2025 have been considered.
Applicant argues that combinations of cited references do not describe or suggest a mixture ratio of the hole transport material and the electron-accepting material in the hole injection layer set to achieve a spin density of the mixture measured by an ESR method of lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3; thus, the rejections should be withdrawn.
The cited rejections refer to the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, and Lee wherein the hole injection layer comprises a mixture of BPAFLP and F4-TCNQ with no specific mixing ratio (section 54 of the last Office Action). Thus, the rejections are withdrawn.
However, Suzuki in view of Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, and Lee does not restrict the mixing ratio of the composite material in the hole injection layer. The doping ratio of F4-TCNQ in an arylamine-based hole transport material is known in the art at the time when the invention was effectively filed.
Xia (US 2019/0103558 A1) discloses an organic light emitting device ([0002], [0016]-[0017]). Xia teaches that an acceptor material F4-TCNQ can be doped in an arylamine hole transport material (m-MTDATA) with a molar ratio of 50:1 ([0017]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila and Lee by applying the molar ratio of the compounds BPAFLP to F4-TCNQ to be 50:1, as taught by Suzuki and Xia.
The modification provides Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia, and Lee comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer (LiF).
The Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on the claimed limitations above but fails to teach that the claimed properties; the hole transport material has a spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3.
It is reasonable to presume that the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee inherently possesses the claimed properties.
Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials which result in the claimed property.
With respect to the spin density in the property, the instant specification recites the spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3 (multiple locations including at least [0012]-[0018], [0045]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) and the electron accepting material (F4-TCNQ) of the hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee have identical structures as the specific embodiments of the hole transport material and the electron accepting material in the instant specification, respectively ([0047], [0046]). Furthermore, the structure of BPAFLP is similar as Applicant’s specific embodiment FLPAPA. The instant specification shows that the spin density of FLPAPA film doped by an acceptor at molar ratio of around 5.5% is around 3E18 spins/cm3 (Fig. 22). The hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee has similar arylamine hole transport material with similar doping concentration of an acceptor material as Applicant’s specific embodiment; therefore, a spin density of the hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee measured by an ESR method should be lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3.
The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed properties would obviously have been present once the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote 4 (CCPA 1977). Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though the rejection is based on Section 103 instead of 102. In re Skoner, et al. (CCPA) 186 USPQ 80.
New grounds of rejection are applied. The amendment necessitates new grounds of rejection, making this Office Action final.
Applicant’s arguments see page 8-10 of the reply filed 01/20/2026 regarding the rejections of claims 1-13 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arasawa/Lee/Seo ‘252, and the rejections of claims 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arasawa/Lee/Seo ‘860/Osaka set forth in the Office Action of 09/19/2025 have been considered.
Applicant argues that combinations of cited references do not describe or suggest a mixture ratio of the hole transport material and the electron-accepting material in the hole injection layer set to achieve a spin density of the mixture measured by an ESR method of lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3; thus, the rejections should be withdrawn.
The cited rejections refer to the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Lee wherein the hole injection layer comprises a mixture of BPAFLP and F4-TCNQ with no specific mixing ratio (section 130 of the last Office Action). Thus, the rejections are withdrawn.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Lee by applying the molar ratio of the compounds BPAFLP to F4-TCNQ to be 50:1 as taught by Xia, as outlined above.
The modification provides Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer.
The Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia Lee reads on the claimed limitations above but fails to teach that the claimed properties; 1) the hole transport material has a spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3.
It is reasonable to presume that the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia Lee inherently possesses the claimed properties.
Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials which result in the claimed property.
With respect to the spin density in the property, the instant specification recites the spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3 (multiple locations including at least [0012]-[0018], [0045]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) and the electron accepting material (F4-TCNQ) of the hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia Lee have identical structures as the specific embodiments of the hole transport material and the electron accepting material in the instant specification, respectively ([0047], [0046]). Furthermore, the structure of BPAFLP is similar as Applicant’s specific embodiment FLPAPA. The instant specification shows that the spin density of FLPAPA film doped by an acceptor at molar ratio of around 5.5% is around 3E18 spins/cm3 (Fig. 22). The hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia Lee has similar arylamine hole transport material with similar doping concentration of the acceptor material as Applicant’s specific embodiment; therefore, a spin density of the hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia Lee measured by an ESR method should be lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3.
The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed properties would obviously have been present once the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote 4 (CCPA 1977). Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though the rejection is based on Section 103 instead of 102. In re Skoner, et al. (CCPA) 186 USPQ 80.
New grounds of rejection are applied. The amendment necessitates new grounds of rejection, making this Office Action final.
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-13 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2014/0091293 A1, hereafter Suzuki) in view of Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1, hereafter Arasawa), Osaka et al. (US 2017/0365782 A1, hereafter Osaka), Ossila et al. (Materials information of F4-TCNQ captured by the Wayback Machine on 07/07/2017, https://web.archive.org/web/20170707152859/https://www.ossila.com/products/f4tcnq, hereafter Ossila), Xia et al. (US 2019/0103558 A1, hereafter Xia) and Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1, hereafter Lee), as evidenced by Seo et al. (US 2012/0286252 A1, hereafter Seo ‘252).
Regarding claims 1-6, 11-13, and 16-18, Suzuki discloses a light emitting device comprising halide in the hole transport layers ([0057]).
Suzuki exemplifies a light emitting device (Example 1 in [0206]-[0214]) comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (DBT3P-II:MoOx), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer (CzPA), an electron transport layer (Bphen), an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode.
In the hole injection layer, the composite material consisting of DBT3P-II and MoOx is each directed to hole transport material and electron acceptor material, respectively ([0083], [0107]).
Suzuki does not exemplify a specific light emitting device comprising BPAFLP and F4-TCNQ in the hole injection layer; however, Suzuki does teach that a material having a hole transport property can be used with an electron acceptor to form a composite material for the hole injection layer ([0083]). Suzuki exemplifies BPAFLP as the material having a hole transport property ([0092]) and F4-TCNQ as the acceptor material ([0083]).
Arasawa also teaches that the hole injection layer can be formed by a composite material comprising a mixture of an organic compound and an electron acceptor ([0136]). Arasawa teaches that BPAFLP can be the organic compound and F4-TCNQ can be the electron acceptor ([0138], [0141]).
Osaka discloses novel fluorene compound used for a light emitting device ([0002]). Osaka exemplifies compound (101) which has identical structure as the Compound BPAFLP of Suzuki ([0020]). Osaka teaches that the fluorene compound of Osaka has high hole transport property such that it provides the light emitting device with high light emission efficiency, low power consumption, and low driving voltage ([0014]).
Ossila teaches that F4-TCNQ is one of the most widely used and effective p-type dopants due to its strong electron accepting ability and extended pi system (first line under “Applications” on page 2).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the light emitting device of Suzuki by substituting the hole transport material DBT3P-II with BPAFLP and the electron accepting material MoOx with F4-TCNQ, as taught by Suzuki, Arasawa, Osaka, and Ossila.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide high hole transport property, high light emission efficiency, low power consumption, and low driving voltage based on the teaching of Osaka; and provide effective p-type doping, strong electron accepting ability, and extended pi conjugation, based on the teaching of Ossila.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Each substitutions of the hole transport materials and the electron accepting materials to form the composite material of the hole injection layer would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B). BPAFLP is one of finite number of exemplified hole transport materials and F4-TCNQ is one of finite number of exemplified electron accepting materials. Each selection of BPAFLP from the hole transport materials and F4-TCNQ from the electron accepting materials would have been one from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(E).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, and Ossila comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer (CzPA), an electron transport layer (Bphen), an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode.
In the device, the hole injection layer materials BPAFLP as a host and F4-TCNQ as an acceptor do not have a specific molar ratio; however, the doping ratio of F4-TCNQ in an arylamine-based hole transport material is known in the art at the time when the invention was effectively filed.
Xia discloses an organic light emitting device ([0002], [0016]-[0017]). Xia teaches that an acceptor material F4-TCNQ can be doped in an arylamine hole transport material (m-MTDATA) with a molar ratio of 50:1 ([0017]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, and Ossila by applying the molar ratio of the compounds BPAFLP to F4-TCNQ to be 50:1, as taught by Suzuki and Xia.
The motivation of doing so would have been to prepare a hole injection layer formed with an arylamine hole transport material of BPAFLP doped with an acceptor material of F4-TCNQ, based on the teaching of Xia.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The doping molar ratio of 50:1 for an arylamine hole transport material and F4-TCNQ acceptor material is known in the art at the time when the invention was effectively filed. The substitution of the doping ratios in preparation of a composite hole injection layer would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, and Xia comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer (CzPA), an electron transport layer (Bphen), an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode.
The electron transport layers do not comprise a metal complex comprising a ligand comprising an 8-hydroxyquinolinato structure and a Li ion.
However, Suzuki does teach that the light emitting device comprises an electron transport layer disposed between the light emitting layer and the hole injection layer ([0070]-[0071], [0081]) and a substance having an electron transport property can be used for the electron transport layer ([0110]).
Lee discloses a light emitting device comprising an electron transport layer having multi-layered structure (Abstract).
Lee teaches the electron transport layer includes a first layer (first material), a first mixed layer (first material and second material), a second layer (second material), a second mixed layer (first material and second material), and a third layer (first material) ([0008]).
Lee teaches that the amount of the second material in the first and second mixed layers can be 30-70 wt%, 45 wt%, or 55 wt% based on 100 parts by weight of each layer ([0064]).
PNG
media_image1.png
322
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee exemplifies Compound 6 as the first material ([0060]) and Liq as the second material ([0061]).
Lee teaches that the stacked structure of the electron transport layer balances electron injection and transport, efficiently blocks holes, and increases the lifetime of the device ([0052], [0007]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, and Xia by substituting the electron transport layers with stacked electron transport layers comprising a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee) as taught by Suzuki and Lee.
The motivation of doing so would have been to balance electron injection and transport, efficiently block holes, and increase the lifetime of the device based on the teaching of Lee.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of the electron transport layers would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia, and Lee comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer (LiF).
The Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on the claimed limitations above but fails to teach that the claimed properties; 1) the hole transport material has a HOMO level of higher than or equal to -5.7 eV and lower than equal to -5.4 eV and a spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3 (claim 1), 2) HOMO level of the electron transport material is higher than or equal to -6.0 eV (claim 4), 3) the electron transport layer has an electron mobility higher than or equal to 1 x 10-7 cm2/Vs and lower than or equal to 5 x 10-5 cm2/Vs when a square root of electric field strength [V/cm] of electron transport layer is 600 (claim 6), 4) the electron accepting material is a material exhibiting an electron accepting property with respect to the hole transport material (claim 11) and a hole mobility lower than or equal to 1 x 10-3 cm2/Vs when the square root of electric field strength [V/m] is 600 (claim 12), 5) the electron mobility of the electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) is lower than the electron mobility of the host material (CzPA) (claim 16), and 6) the emission center material (1,6mMemFLPAPm ) emits blue fluorescence (claims 17-18).
It is reasonable to presume that the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee inherently possesses the claimed properties 1) to 6) above.
Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials which result in the claimed property.
With respect to the HOMO level of the hole transport material in the property 1), the instant specification states that the hole transport material of the invention has a HOMO level of higher than or equal to -5.7 eV and lower than equal to -5.4 eV ([0022], [0044]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee have identical structure as the specific embodiments of hole transport material in the instant specification ([0047]). Therefore, the hole transport material (BPAFLP) has a HOMO level of higher than or equal to -5.7 eV and lower than equal to -5.4 eV.
With respect to the spin density in the property 1), the instant specification recites the spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3 (multiple locations including at least [0012]-[0018], [0045]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) and the electron accepting material (F4-TCNQ) of the hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee have identical structures as the specific embodiments of the hole transport material and the electron accepting material in the instant specification, respectively ([0047], [0046]). Furthermore, the structure of BPAFLP is similar as Applicant’s specific embodiment FLPAPA. The instant specification shows that the spin density of FLPAPA film doped by an acceptor at molar ratio of around 5.5% is around 3E18 spins/cm3 (Fig. 22). The hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee has similar arylamine hole transport material with similar doping concentration of the acceptor material as Applicant’s specific embodiment; therefore, a spin density of the hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee measured by an ESR method should be lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3, meeting all the limitations of claims 1-3 and 13.
For the property 2), the instant specification states that the HOMO level of the electron transport material is higher than or equal to -6.0 eV ([0015]). The electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) has identical structure as the specific embodiment ZADN of the instant specification (Table 1). Therefore, the HOMO level of the electron transport material is higher than or equal to -6.0 eV, meeting all the limitations of claims 4-5.
For the property 3), the instant specification states that the electron transport layer has an electron mobility higher than or equal to 1 x 10-7 cm2/Vs and lower than or equal to 5 x 10-5 cm2/Vs when a square root of electric field strength [V/cm] of electron transport layer is 600 ([0017]). The electron transport layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee (i.e. the first or second mixed layer) consists of the Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44. Compound 6 and Liq are each identical to the constituting materials ZADN and Liq of the electron transport layer of the specific embodiment of the instant disclosure (Tables 1 and 2). Therefore, the electron transport layer has an electron mobility higher than or equal to 1 x 10-7 cm2/Vs and lower than or equal to 5 x 10-5 cm2/Vs when a square root of electric field strength [V/cm] of electron transport layer is 600, meeting all the limitations of claim 6.
For the property 4), the instant specification states that the electron accepting material is a material exhibiting an electron accepting property with respect to the hole transport material ([0022]) and a hole mobility lower than or equal to 1 x 10-3 cm2/Vs when the square root of electric field strength [V/m] is 600 ([0023], [0048]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) and the electron accepting material (F4-TCNQ) of the hole injection layer of the device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee have identical structure as the specific embodiments of hole transport material and the electron accepting material in the instant specification, respectively ([0047], [0046]). Furthermore, Suzuki teaches that the hole mobility of the hole transport material of Suzuki is 10-6 cm2/Vs or more ([0092]). The Compound BPAFLP is one of specific embodiments of the hole transport material of Suzuki ([0092]). Therefore, the electron accepting material is a material exhibiting an electron accepting property with respect to the hole transport material and the hole transport material has a hole mobility lower than or equal to 1 x 10-3 cm2/Vs when the square root of electric field strength [V/m] is 600, meeting all the limitations of claims 11-12.
For the property 5), the instant specification states that the light emitting device of the invention, the electron mobility of the electron transport material is lower than the electron mobility of the host material ([0030]). The electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) has identical structure as the specific embodiment ZADN of the instant specification (Table 1). The host material (CzPA) has identical structure as one of specific and preferred embodiments of the instant invention ([0081]). Therefore, the electron mobility of the electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) is lower than the electron mobility of the host material (CzPA) (claim 16), meeting all the limitations of claim 16.
For the property 6) the compound 1,6mMemFLPAPm has identical structure as the specific embodiments of fluorescent substances of the instant invention ([0059]-[0060]). Furthermore, Seo ‘252 evidences that the light emitting device comprising the 1,6mMemFLPAPm as the emitter of the device emits blue light (Table 5, [0153]). Therefore, the emission center material (1,6mMemFLPAPm ) emits blue fluorescence (claims 17-18), meeting all the limitations of claims 17-18.
The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed properties would obviously have been present once the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote 4 (CCPA 1977). Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though the rejection is based on Section 103 instead of 102. In re Skoner, et al. (CCPA) 186 USPQ 80.
Regarding claims 1 and 7-10, the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
The second mixed layer and the third layer reads on all the limitations of the first and second regions of an electron transport layer.
Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee is equated with a light emitting device comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a fluorescent dopant), a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a first region of an electron transport layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second region of an electron transport layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode.
Regarding claim 19, the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
Suzuki does not disclose a specific electronic device comprising the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee and a sensor, an operation button, a speaker, or a microphone.
However, Suzuki does teach that a light emitting device can be incorporated in an electronic device (i.e. portable game machine) with a microphone ([0171], Fig. 8C).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee by incorporating it into a portable game machine with a microphone, as taught by Suzuki and Lee.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of a light emitting devices in a portable game machine would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides an electronic device comprising the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee and a microphone.
Regarding claim 20, the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
Suzuki does not disclose a specific light emitting apparatus comprising the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee and a transistor.
However, Suzuki does teach that a light emitting device can be incorporated in a light emitting apparatus (i.e. active matrix light emitting device) with a transistor (“TFT” in [0132]-[0145], Fig. 3A and 3B).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee by incorporating it into an active matrix light emitting device with a transistor, as taught by Suzuki and Lee.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of a light emitting devices in an active matrix light emitting device would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides a light emitting apparatus comprising the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee and a transistor.
Regarding claim 21, the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
Suzuki does not disclose a specific lighting device comprising the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee and a housing.
However, Suzuki does teach that a light emitting device can be incorporated in a lighting device (i.e. “table lamp”) with a housing ([0182], Fig. 10).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee by incorporating it into a table lamp with a housing, as taught by Suzuki and Lee.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of a light emitting devices in a lighting device would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides a lighting device comprising the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee and a housing.
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2014/0091293 A1) in view of Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1), Osaka et al. (US 2017/0365782 A1), Ossila et al. (Materials information of F4-TCNQ captured by the Wayback Machine on 07/07/2017, https://web.archive.org/web/20170707152859/https://www.ossila.com/products/f4tcnq), Xia et al. (US 2019/0103558 A1), and Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1) as applied to claims 1-13 and 16-21 above, further in view of Seo et al. (US 2002/0121860 A1, hereafter Seo ‘860), as evidenced by Sung et al. (US 2013/0153903 A1, hereafter Sung).
Regarding claims 13-15, the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (PCzPA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a dopant), a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), an electron injection layer (LiF), and a cathode.
The hole transport layer material of the device is not m-MTDATA; however, Suzuki does teach that m-MTDATA (4,4’,4”-tris[N-(3-methylphenyl)-N-phenylamino]triphenylamine) can be used for the hole transport layer ([0092]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee by substituting the hole transport layer material PCzPA with m-MTDATA as taught by Suzuki.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of the hole transport layer materials would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B). The selection of m-MTDATA as the hole transport layer material would have been one from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(E).
The resultant device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (m-MTDATA), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a fluorescent dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer (LiF).
The device does not comprise a mixed layer between the hole transport layer and the light emitting layer.
Seo ‘860 teaches that a mixed layer between two neighboring organic layers of an organic optoelectronic device (“organic light-emitting device”) contains both the neighboring organic layer materials (“mixed layer” (105) in Fig. 1B; [050]).
Seo ‘860 teaches that by introducing a mixed layer in-between two neighboring organic layers (device structure of Fig. 1B), the energy barrier is lowered and more carriers can be injected ([054]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia and Lee by incorporating a mixed layer between the hole transport layer and the light emitting layer, as taught by Seo ‘860.
The motivation of doing so would provide the organic optoelectronic device with lowered energy barrier and improved carrier injection, based on the teaching of Seo ‘860.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (m-MTDATA), a mixed layer comprising m-MTDATA, a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a fluorescent dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer (LiF).
The Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 reads on the claimed limitations above but fails to teach that the mixed layer comprising m-MTDATA is capable of blocking electrons.
It is reasonable to presume that the mixed layer comprising m-MTDATA is capable of blocking electrons.
Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials which result in the claimed property.
Sung evidences that m-MTDATA is used as the electron blocking layer material of a light emitting device and states that m-MTDATA effectively blocks electron transmission and suitable as electron blocking layer material ([0075]-[0076]).
Therefore, the mixed layer is capable of blocking electrons such that the mixed layer is equated with an electron blocking layer.
The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed properties would obviously have been present once the Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote 4 (CCPA 1977). Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though the rejection is based on Section 103 instead of 102. In re Skoner, et al. (CCPA) 186 USPQ 80.
Light emitting device of Suzuki as modified by Arasawa, Osaka, Ossila, Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 is equated with a light emitting device comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a first hole transport layer (m-MTDATA), a second hole transport layer (electron blocking layer) comprising m-MTDATA, a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and 1,6mMemFLPAPm as a fluorescent dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer (LiF), wherein the second hole transport layer functions as an electron blocking layer.
Claims 1-13 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1) in view of Xia et al. (US 2019/0103558 A1) and Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1), as evidenced by Seo et al. (US 2012/0286252 A1).
Regarding claims 1-6, 11-13, and 16-18, Arasawa discloses a light emitting device comprising halide in the hole transport layers ([0057]).
Arasawa exemplifies a light emitting device (Fig. 7, [0128]) comprising an anode (121), a hole injection layer (1111), a hole transport layer (1112), a light emitting layer (1113), an electron transport layer (1114), an electron injection layer (1115), and a cathode (131).
Arasawa does not exemplifies a specific light emitting device comprising BPAFLP and F4-TCNQ; however, Arasawa does teach that the hole injection layer can be a composite material comprising an organic compound and an electron acceptor ([0136]), and exemplifies BPAFLP as the organic compound ([0138]) and F4-TCNQ as the electron acceptor ([0141]). Arasawa teaches that the hole transport layer material can be BPAFLP ([0143]). Arasawa teaches the light emitting layer can comprise a blue fluorescence emitter ([0146]) and a host CzPA ([0150]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the light emitting device of Arasawa by substituting the hole injection layer material with a composite material comprising BPAFLP and F4-TCNQ, the hole transport layer with BPAFLP, and the light emitting layer material with a host CzPA doped with a blue fluorescence emitter, as taught by Arasawa.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Each substitution of the hole injection layer materials, hole transport layer materials, and the light emitting layer materials would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B). Each selection of the hole injection layer material, the hole transport layer material, and the light emitting host material from the specific examples would have been one from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(E).
The modification provides Modified light emitting device of Arasawa comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode.
In the device, the hole injection layer materials BPAFLP as a host and F4-TCNQ as an acceptor do not have a specific molar ratio; however, the doping ratio of F4-TCNQ in an arylamine-based hole transport material is known in the art at the time when the invention was effectively filed.
Xia discloses an organic light emitting device ([0002], [0016]-[0017]). Xia teaches that an acceptor material F4-TCNQ can be doped in an arylamine hole transport material (m-MTDATA) with a molar ratio of 50:1 ([0017]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Modified light emitting device of Arasawa by applying the molar ratio of the compounds BPAFLP to F4-TCNQ to be 50:1, as taught by Arasawa and Xia.
The motivation of doing so would have been to prepare a hole injection layer formed with an arylamine hole transport material of BPAFLP doped with an acceptor material of F4-TCNQ, based on the teaching of Xia.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The doping molar ratio of 50:1 for an arylamine hole transport material and F4-TCNQ acceptor material is known in the art at the time when the invention was effectively filed. The substitution of the doping ratios in preparation of a composite hole injection layer would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode.
The electron transport layers do not comprise a metal complex comprising a ligand comprising an 8-hydroxyquinolinato structure and a Li ion.
However, Arasawa does teach that the structure of the light emitting device between the anode and the cathode is not limited and can be a layer formed using a substance with a high electron transport property and high electron injection property ([0156]).
Lee discloses a light emitting device comprising an electron transport layer having multi-layered structure (Abstract).
Lee teaches the electron transport layer includes a first layer (first material), a first mixed layer (first material and second material), a second layer (second material), a second mixed layer (first material and second material), and a third layer (first material) ([0008]).
Lee teaches that the amount of the second material in the first and second mixed layers can be 30-70 wt%, 45 wt%, or 55 wt% based on 100 parts by weight of each layer ([0064]).
PNG
media_image1.png
322
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee exemplifies Compound 6 as the first material ([0060]) and Liq as the second material ([0061]).
Lee teaches that the stacked structure of the electron transport layer balances electron injection and transport, efficiently blocks holes, and increases the lifetime of the device ([0052], [0007]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia by substituting the electron transport layer with stacked electron transport layers comprising a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee) as taught by Arasawa and Lee.
The motivation of doing so would have been to balance electron injection and transport, efficiently block holes, and increase the lifetime of the device based on the teaching of Lee.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer.
The Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee reads on the claimed limitations above but fails to teach that the claimed properties; 1) the hole transport material has a HOMO level of higher than or equal to -5.7 eV and lower than equal to -5.4 eV and a spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3 (claim 1), 2) HOMO level of the electron transport material is higher than or equal to -6.0 eV (claim 4), 3) the electron transport layer has an electron mobility higher than or equal to 1 x 10-7 cm2/Vs and lower than or equal to 5 x 10-5 cm2/Vs when a square root of electric field strength [V/cm] of electron transport layer is 600 (claim 6), 4) the electron accepting material is a material exhibiting an electron accepting property with respect to the hole transport material (claim 11) and a hole mobility lower than or equal to 1 x 10-3 cm2/Vs when the square root of electric field strength [V/m] is 600 (claim 12), and 5) the electron mobility of the electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) is lower than the electron mobility of the host material (CzPA) (claim 16).
It is reasonable to presume that the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee inherently possesses the claimed properties 1) to 5) above.
Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials which result in the claimed property.
With respect to the HOMO level of the hole transport material in the property 1), the instant specification states that the hole transport material of the invention has a HOMO level of higher than or equal to -5.7 eV and lower than equal to -5.4 eV ([0022], [0044]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee have identical structure as the specific embodiments of hole transport material in the instant specification ([0047]). Therefore, the hole transport material (BPAFLP) has a HOMO level of higher than or equal to -5.7 eV and lower than equal to -5.4 eV.
With respect to the spin density in the property 1), the instant specification recites the spin density of the hole injection layer measured by an ESR method is lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3 (multiple locations including at least [0012]-[0018], [0045]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) and the electron accepting material (F4-TCNQ) of the hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee have identical structures as the specific embodiments of the hole transport material and the electron accepting material in the instant specification, respectively ([0047], [0046]). Furthermore, the structure of BPAFLP is similar as Applicant’s specific embodiment FLPAPA. The instant specification shows that the spin density of FLPAPA film doped by an acceptor at molar ratio of around 5.5% is around 3E18 spins/cm3 (Fig. 22). The hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee has similar arylamine hole transport material with similar doping concentration of the acceptor material as Applicant’s specific embodiment; therefore, a spin density of the hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee measured by an ESR method should be lower than or equal to 1 x 1019 spins/cm3, meeting all the limitations of claims 1-3, 13, and 17-18.
For the property 2), the instant specification states that the HOMO level of the electron transport material is higher than or equal to -6.0 eV ([0015]). The electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) has identical structure as the specific embodiment ZADN of the instant specification (Table 1). Therefore, the HOMO level of the electron transport material is higher than or equal to -6.0 eV, meeting all the limitations of claims 4-5.
For the property 3), the instant specification states that the electron transport layer has an electron mobility higher than or equal to 1 x 10-7 cm2/Vs and lower than or equal to 5 x 10-5 cm2/Vs when a square root of electric field strength [V/cm] of electron transport layer is 600 ([0017]). The electron transport layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee (i.e. the first or second mixed layer) consists of the Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44. Compound 6 and Liq are each identical to the constituting materials ZADN and Liq of the electron transport layer of the specific embodiment of the instant disclosure (Tables 1 and 2). Therefore, the electron transport layer has an electron mobility higher than or equal to 1 x 10-7 cm2/Vs and lower than or equal to 5 x 10-5 cm2/Vs when a square root of electric field strength [V/cm] of electron transport layer is 600, meeting all the limitations of claim 6.
For the property 4), the instant specification states that the electron accepting material is a material exhibiting an electron accepting property with respect to the hole transport material ([0022]) and a hole mobility lower than or equal to 1 x 10-3 cm2/Vs when the square root of electric field strength [V/m] is 600 ([0023], [0048]). The hole transport material (BPAFLP) and the electron accepting material (F4-TCNQ) of the hole injection layer of the device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee have identical structure as the specific embodiments of hole transport material and the electron accepting material in the instant specification, respectively ([0047], [0046]). Furthermore, Arasawa teaches that the hole mobility of the hole transport material of Arasawa is 10-6 cm2/Vs or more ([0137]). The Compound BPAFLP is one of specific embodiments of the hole transport material of Arasawa ([0092]). Therefore, the electron accepting material is a material exhibiting an electron accepting property with respect to the hole transport material and the hole transport material has a hole mobility lower than or equal to 1 x 10-3 cm2/Vs when the square root of electric field strength [V/m] is 600, meeting all the limitations of claims 11-12.
For the property 5), the instant specification states that the light emitting device of the invention, the electron mobility of the electron transport material is lower than the electron mobility of the host material ([0030]). The electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) has identical structure as the specific embodiment ZADN of the instant specification (Table 1). The host material (CzPA) has identical structure as one of specific and preferred embodiments of the instant invention ([0081]). Therefore, the electron mobility of the electron transport material (Compound 6 of Lee) is lower than the electron mobility of the host material (CzPA) (claim 16), meeting all the limitations of claim 16.
The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed properties would obviously have been present once the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote 4 (CCPA 1977). Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though the rejection is based on Section 103 instead of 102. In re Skoner, et al. (CCPA) 186 USPQ 80.
Regarding claims 1 and 7-10, the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
The second mixed layer and the third layer reads on all the limitations of the first and second regions of an electron transport layer.
Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee is equated with a light emitting device comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a fluorescent dopant), a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a first region of an electron transport layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second region of an electron transport layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer, and a cathode.
Regarding claims 19 and 21, the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
Arasawa in view of Xia and Lee does not disclose a specific electronic device comprising the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee and a sensor, an operation button, a speaker, or a microphone.
However, Arasawa does teach that a light emitting device can be incorporated in an electronic device (i.e. cellular phone) with a housing and microphone ([0201], Fig. 10D).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee by incorporating it into a cellular phone with a housing and a microphone, as taught by Arasawa and Lee.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of a light emitting devices in a cellular phone would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides a cellular phone comprising the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee, a housing and a microphone, wherein the cellular phone is an electronic device and also a lighting device.
Regarding claim 20, the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a dopant), an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee).
Arasawa in view of Xia and Lee does not disclose a specific light emitting apparatus comprising the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee and a transistor.
However, Arasawa does teach that a light emitting device can be incorporated in a light emitting apparatus (Embodiment 1 in [0038]-[0042]) with a transistor (100 in Fig. 2).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee by incorporating it into a light emitting apparatus with a transistor, as taught by Arasawa and Lee.
The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). The substitution of a light emitting devices in a light emitting apparatus would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides a light emitting apparatus comprising the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee and a transistor.
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arasawa et al. (US 2011/0254037 A1) in view of Xia et al. (US 2019/0103558 A1) and Lee et al. (US 2011/0084259 A1) as applied to claims 1-13 and 16-21 above, further in view of Seo et al. (US 2002/0121860 A1), as evidenced by Osaka et al. (US 2017/0365782 A1).
Regarding claims 13-15, the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee reads on all the features of claim 1 as outline above.
The device comprises an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a dopant), a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), and a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), an electron injection layer, and a cathode.
The device does not comprise a mixed layer between the hole transport layer and the light emitting layer.
Seo ‘860 teaches that a mixed layer between two neighboring organic layers of an organic optoelectronic device (“organic light-emitting device”) contains both the neighboring organic layer materials (“mixed layer” (105) in Fig. 1B; [050]).
Seo ‘860 teaches that by introducing a mixed layer in-between two neighboring organic layers (device structure of Fig. 1B), the energy barrier is lowered and more carriers can be injected ([054]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia and Lee by incorporating a mixed layer between the hole transport layer and the light emitting layer, as taught by Seo ‘860.
The motivation of doing so would provide the organic optoelectronic device with lowered energy barrier and improved carrier injection, based on the teaching of Seo ‘860.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The modification provides Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a mixed layer comprising BPAFLP, a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a fluorescent dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer.
The Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 reads on the claimed limitations above but fails to teach that the mixed layer comprising BPAFLP is capable of blocking electrons.
It is reasonable to presume that the mixed layer comprising BPAFLP is capable of blocking electrons.
Support for said presumption is found in the use of like materials which result in the claimed property.
Osaka evidences that BPAFLP has high ability to block electrons ([0308]).
Therefore, the mixed layer is capable of blocking electrons such that the mixed layer is equated with an electron blocking layer.
The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald 205 USPQ 594. In addition, the presently claimed properties would obviously have been present once the Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 product is provided. Note In re Best, 195 USPQ at 433, footnote 4 (CCPA 1977). Reliance upon inherency is not improper even though the rejection is based on Section 103 instead of 102. In re Skoner, et al. (CCPA) 186 USPQ 80.
Light emitting device of Arasawa as modified by Xia, Lee and Seo ‘860 is equated with a light emitting device comprising an anode, a hole injection layer (BPAFLP:F4-TCNQ with molar ratio of 50:1), a first hole transport layer (BPAFLP), a second hole transport layer (electron blocking layer) comprising BPAFLP, a light emitting layer (CzPA as a host and a blue fluorescent emitter as a fluorescent dopant), an electron transport layer, and a cathode, wherein the electron transport layer contains a first layer (Compound 6 of Lee), a first mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a second layer (Liq), a second mixed layer (Compound 6 of Lee and Liq with weight ratio of 45:55 or 55:44), a third layer (Compound 6 of Lee), and an electron injection layer, wherein the second hole transport layer functions as an electron blocking layer.
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 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 SEOKMIN JEON whose telephone number is (571)272-4599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm EST.
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.
/SEOKMIN JEON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786