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 .
Response to Amendment
In the response filed 01/23/2026, the claims were amended.
These amendments are hereby entered.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 1-35 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (US 2020/0091442 A1) in view of Chan et al. (WO 2021/080368 A1) is withdrawn by the Office.
Claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 14-15, 23, and 30 have been amended.
Claims 2-3 and 12 are canceled.
Claims 1, 4-11, and 13-35 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant’s argument that Cai is based on an entirely different inventive concept because it does not teach the instantly claimed host compounds, Examiner disagrees.
Examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the prior art teaches a reason to add the claimed host compounds of instant formulae 2 and 3 to the organometallic compound of Cai, and a prima facie case of obviousness is present through combining of references. The prior art does not need to teach every limitation of the instant claims in a single reference (MPEP 2142).
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4-11, and 13-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to independent claims 1 and 30, the definition of X3 through X8 include the limitation that each of X3 through X8 can be selected as a carbon atom, which appears to form a carbon radical.
In continuing examination, X3 through X8 will be interpreted as being selected from CRx and N.
With respect to claims 23, 25, 27, and 35, independent claims 1 and 30 have been amended to limit the definition of Ar2 to a substituted or unsubstituted aryl group of 6 to 30 carbon atoms. Dependent claims 23, 25, 27, and 35 all comprises definitions for Ar2 or definitions for a character at an analogous position which encompasses a moiety outside the scope of C6-C30 aryl. For example, claim 23 has carbazolyl groups at this location, claim 25 defines Ar2 as being selected from a group comprising heteroaryl having 3 to 20 carbon atoms, claim 27 contains compounds with a carbazolyl group at this location, and claim 35 defines Ar2 are being selected from a Markush group comprising several heteroaryl groups.
In continuing examination, only formulae and definitions for Ar2 which include a C6-C30 aryl group will be considered.
Claims 4-11, 13-22, 24, 26, 28-29, and 31-34 are rejected by virtue of dependency.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 23, 25, 27, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Independent claims 1 and 30 have been amended to limit the definition of Ar2 to a substituted or unsubstituted aryl group of 6 to 30 carbon atoms. Dependent claims 23, 25, 27, and 35 all comprises definitions for Ar2 or definitions for a character at an analogous position which encompasses a moiety outside the scope of C6-C30 aryl. For example, claim 23 has carbazolyl groups at this location, claim 25 defines Ar2 as being selected from a group comprising heteroaryl having 3 to 20 carbon atoms, claim 27 contains compounds with a carbazolyl group at this location, and claim 35 defines Ar2 are being selected from a Markush group comprising several heteroaryl groups.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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, 4-11, and 13-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (US 2020/0091442 A1) in view of Zeng et al. (US 2017/0054087 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Cai discloses an electroluminescent device (paragraph 0022), comprising an anode (paragraph 0023), a cathode (paragraph 0024), and an organic layer between the electrodes (paragraph 0025), and the organic layer comprises a metal complex represented by Formula 1 (paragraph 0025), such as compound Ir(La110)(Lb1)2 (page 36), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
336
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Formula 5 when R is alkyl (methyl), X is oxygen, X3 through X6 and X8 are all CRx when Rx is a hydrogen atom, X7 is CRx wherein Rx is a fluorine atom, and R1 through R8 are hydrogen atoms.
However, while Cai teaches that the emission layer may further comprise a wide variety of hosts (paragraph 0130), Cai does not teach the instantly claimed host mixture.
In analogous art, Zeng teaches a mixture of a carbazole and a triazine derivative that can be stably thermally evaporated from one crucible to fabricate thin films for electroluminescent devices (abstract). Zeng teaches this mixture includes a hole transporting cohost (h-host) and an electron transporting cohost (e-host) (paragraph 0082, lines 2-6).
Zeng gives an example of the h-host material (paragraph 0117), Compound H4 (page 82), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
272
746
media_image2.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of the instant first compound of instant Formula 2 when U is, at each occurrence, CH, V is, at each occurrence, CH, L-1 is a single bond, one of L2 is a single bond and the other L2 is an arylene having 6 carbon atoms (m-phenylene).
Zeng also gives an example of the e-host material (paragraph 0115), C163 (page 46) which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image3.png
356
318
media_image3.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of the instant second compound of instant Formula 3 when Ar1 has the structure of Formula A, all three of L3 are a single bond, and both of Ar2 are an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl). In Formula A, Z is oxygen, Z3 is CRz wherein Rz is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Z1 represents a bond to L3, and all other Z characters are CH.
Zeng teaches that premixing two or more materials and evaporating them from one VTE sublimation crucible can reduce the number of VTE evaporation sources and simplify the fabrication process of an organic light emitting device (paragraph 0083, lines 1-3), and that the disclosed mixture of h- and e-hosts can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single source.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the dual host composition of Zeng as the host composition for the dopant of Cai in order to form a composition which can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single crucible in order to simplify the fabrication process, as taught by Zeng.
With respect to claim 4, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and the metal complex has the structure of Formula 5 wherein m is 1, X is oxygen, X7 is a CRx and Rx is a fluorine atom. All other X characters are CH and all other R characters are non-substitution or hydrogen, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 5, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and X is oxygen, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 6, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 4, and X7 is fluorine, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 7, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 4, as discussed above.
The phenylpyridine ligand of Cai compound Ir(La110)(Lb1)2 is derived from Cai ligand Lb. Cai also teaches that Lb can be selected as Lb8, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image4.png
166
226
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when R6 and R7 are unsubstituted alkyl having 1 carbon atom (methyl).
Cai teaches that the compounds of the invention provide much longer device lifetime, better thermal stability, no blue-shifted illumination, and higher luminous efficiency.
Cai includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Cai being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which provides much longer device lifetime, better thermal stability, no blue-shifted illumination, and higher luminous efficiency, commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 8, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 4, and the compound pictured and discussed above meets the requirements of the instant claim when X7 and X8 are CRx when the Rx associated with X7 is fluorine and the Rx associated with X8 is a hydrogen atom, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 9, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and R is a methyl group, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 10, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and La is selected as La89, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 11, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 3, and Lb is selected as Lb1, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 13, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and the metal complex is instant GD96, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 14, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and the first compound, pictured and discussed above, meets the requirements of instant Formula 2a when U is, at each occurrence, CH or a bond to L1, V is, at each occurrence, CH, L-1 is a single bond, both of L2 are a single bond and Ar4 is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), as pictured above.
With respect to claim 15, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and the first compound has the structure of Formula 2b when U is, at each occurrence, CH, V is, at each occurrence, CH, L-1 is a single bond, and Ar4 is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), as pictured above.
With respect to claim 16, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and each U is CH and each V is CH, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 17, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and Ru and Rv are each hydrogen, as discussed above.
With respect to claims 18-20, and 22, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and Z3 is CRz wherein Rz is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Z1 represents a carbon atom bonded to L3, and all other Z characters are CRz when Rz is a hydrogen atom.
With respect to claim 21, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, as discussed above.
Zeng also teaches Compound C1 (page 27), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image5.png
270
296
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of parent claim 1 and of the instant claim when Ar1 has the structure of Formula A, all three of L3 are a single bond, and both of Ar2 are an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl). In Formula A, Z is oxygen, Z8 is CRz wherein Rz is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Z1 represents a bond to L3, and all other Z characters are CH.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use any of the triazine compounds of the dual host composition of Zeng as the host composition for the dopant of Cai in order to form a composition which can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single crucible in order to simplify the fabrication process, as taught by Zeng.
With respect to claims 23 and 25, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 14, as discussed above. Zeng also teaches Compound D37 (page 62), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image6.png
296
506
media_image6.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of parent claim 1 and of Formula 3-3 of the instant claim when Ar1 has the structure of Formula A, two of L3 are a single bond and the third L3 is a m-phenylene group, and both of Ar2 are an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl). In Formula A, Z is oxygen, Z1 (Ar3) is CRz wherein Rz is a substituted aryl having 13 carbon atoms (fluorenyl), Z5 represents a bond to L3, and all other Z characters are CH.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use any of the triazine compounds of the dual host composition of Zeng as the host composition for the dopant of Cai in order to form a composition which can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single crucible in order to simplify the fabrication process, as taught by Zeng.
With respect to claim 24, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1 and L1-L3 are each a single bond, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 25, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 23, and both of Ar2 are an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Ar3 is a substituted aryl having 13 carbon atoms (fluorenyl), and Ar4 is a aryl group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl) as discussed above.
With respect to claim 26, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and the first compound is instant compound 2-1, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 27, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, as discussed above.
Compound C163, pictured and discussed above, is derived from Zeng Formula I (paragraph 0086), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
200
356
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Zeng also teaches that L2 is a phenylene group (paragraph 0018) and together with G2 form a biphenyl group.
Such a modification produces instant compound H-166.
Zeng includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Zeng being a lack of the aforementioned biphenyl combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known linking group from the finite list of possible linking groups to arrive at compound H-166 of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a triazine e-host which can be used in a dual host composition which can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single crucible in order to simplify the fabrication process, commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 28, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and Cai also teaches use of the metal complex in the light emitting layer at a 8% concentration by weight (Table 1, page 42).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the metal complex at a 8% concentration by weight with a host composition, as taught by Cai.
With respect to claim 29, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 1, and Cai also teaches use of the luminescence device in a display apparatus (paragraph 0044).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the electroluminescent device in an electronic device such as a display apparatus, as taught by Cai.
With respect to claim 30, Cai discloses compound Ir(La110)(Lb1)2 (page 36), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
336
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Formula 5 when R is alkyl (methyl), X is oxygen, X3 through X6 and X8 are all CRx when Rx is a hydrogen atom, X7 is CRx wherein Rx is a fluorine atom, and R1 through R8 are hydrogen atoms.
However, while Cai teaches that the emission layer may further comprise a wide variety of hosts (paragraph 0130), Cai does not teach the instantly claimed host mixture.
In analogous art, Zeng teaches a mixture of a carbazole and a triazine derivative that can be stably thermally evaporated from one crucible to fabricate thin films for electroluminescent devices (abstract). Zeng teaches this mixture includes a hole transporting cohost (h-host) and an electron transporting cohost (e-host) (paragraph 0082, lines 2-6).
Zeng gives an example of h-host material (paragraph 0117), Compound H4 (page 82), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
272
746
media_image2.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of the instant first compound of instant Formula 2 when U is, at each occurrence, CH, V is, at each occurrence, CH, L-1 is a single bond, one of L2 is a single bond and the other L2 is an arylene having 6 carbon atoms (m-phenylene).
Zeng gives an example of the e-host material (paragraph 0115), C163 (page 46) which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image3.png
356
318
media_image3.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of the instant second compound of instant Formula 3 when Ar1 has the structure of Formula A, all three of L3 are a single bond, and both of Ar2 are an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl). In Formula A, Z is oxygen, Z3 is CRz wherein Rz is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Z1 represents a bond to L3, and all other Z characters are CH.
Zeng teaches that premixing two or more materials and evaporating them from one VTE sublimation crucible can reduce the number of VTE evaporation sources and simplify the fabrication process of an organic light emitting device (paragraph 0083, lines 1-3), and that the disclosed mixture of h- and e-hosts can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single source.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the dual host composition of Zeng as the host composition for the dopant of Cai in order to form a composition which can be premixed and stably co-evaporated from a single crucible in order to simplify the fabrication process, as taught by Zeng.
Such a combination forms a composition that meets the requirements of the instant claim.
With respect to claim 31, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 7, and R6 and R7 are unsubstituted alkyl having 1 carbon atom (methyl), as discussed above.
With respect to claim 32, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 17, and Ru and Rv are each hydrogen, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 33, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 20, and Z3 is CRz wherein Rz is an aryl having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Z1 represents a carbon atom bonded to L3, and all other Z characters are CRz when Rz is a hydrogen atom, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 34, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 24, and L-1-L3 are each a single bond, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 35, Cai and Zeng teach the device of claim 25 and both of Ar2 are a phenyl group, Ar3 is fluorenyl, and Ar4 is also phenyl, as discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated any 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 RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M..
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.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights