DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/06/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 6-7, 9, 15, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Spindler (US 2007/0070231596) (Spindler).
In reference to claims 1, 3, 6-7, 9, 15, and 23, Spindler teaches an organic light emitting device and exemplifies such devices including device example 3 that includes an anode, a cathode, a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer 3, a hole transport layer 2, a hole transport layer 1, an emission layer, and an electron transport layer wherein the hole transport layer 2 comprises 3 components that are NPB, AH3 and rubrene, the hole transport layer 1 comprises NPB and AH3 and is in contact with the emission layer, the electron transport layer comprises a mixture of Alq, B-phen and Li and the emission layer comprises NPB, AH3, and M7 as a light emitting dopant that reads on the instant claims (Spindler [0187]).
It is noted that while many of the names of materials functions is not identical to those instantly claimed, the specific names given to a component of a layered thin film device are not particularly limiting. For example, the names “hole transporting material” and an “electron transporting material” do not limit the structures of the material present in the layer, all conduction in such devices is from the movement of electrons.
Spindler teaches the device as described above. While Spindler does not expressly name any of the layers in the device to be a “charge generation layer”, the claimed layer does not have any specific positional requirements in the device and therefore the doped HTL 2 in the device meets the claim requirements of a charge generation layer.
While the dopant of the HTL 2 is not called a n-conductivity dopant or a p-conductivity dopant, the claim does not make any specific structural requirements for the dopant and therefore the dopant of HTL 2 meets the claim requirements.
For Claim 1: The emission layer meets the requirements of an emission layer and the hole transport layer 1 meets the requirements of a first layer that is an m-EBL comprising two components and wherein condition ii is met with HTL 2 to be the CGL with a dopant.
For Claim 3: The electron transport layer meets the requirements of a m-ETL that comprises 3 components.
For Claim 6: M7 reads on an emitter, NPB a hole transport host and AH3 an electron transport host.
For Claim 7: Any material of the EML meets the acceptor requirement.
For Claim 9: Reads on wherein m-EBL comprises two materials that could be hole or electron transporting.
For Claim 15: Several layers include such materials.
For Claim 23: Reads on wherein the device comprises a charge generation layer.
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, 3, 6-10, 12-20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spindler (US 2007/0070231596) in view of Lin (US 2020/00168818).
In reference to Claims 1, 3, 6-10, 12-20, and 23, Spindler teaches an organic light emitting device with multiple hole transport layers comprising multiple materials and exemplifies such devices including device example 3 that includes an anode, a cathode, a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer3, a hole transport layer 2, a hole transport layer 1, an emission layer, and an electron transport layer wherein the hole transport layer 2 comprises 3 components that are NPB, Ah3 and rubrene, the hole transport layer 1 comprises NPB and AH3, the electron transport layer comprises a mixture of Alq, B-phen and Li and is in contact with the emission layer that are useful in display panel products (Spindler [0023] [0187]).
It is noted that while many of the names of materials functions is not identical to those instantly claimed, the specific names given to a component of a layered thin film device are not particularly limiting. For example, the names “hole transporting material” and an “electron transporting material” do not limit the structures of the material present in the layer, all conduction in such devices is from the movement of electrons.
Spindler teaches the device as described above. While Spindler does not expressly name any of the layers in the device to be a “charge generation layer”, the claimed layer does not have any specific positional requirements in the device and therefore the doped HTL 2 in the device meets the claim requirements of a charge generation layer.
While the dopant of the HTL 2 is not called a n-conductivity dopant or a p-conductivity dopant, the claim does not make any specific structural requirements for the dopant and therefore the dopant of HTL 2 meets the claim requirements.
While Spindler teaches emission layers comprising multiple host materials, it does not expressly teach the claimed emitting layers comprising 3 host materials and a phosphorescent material.
With respect to the difference, Lin teaches OLED devices comprising emitting layers including three host materials and a phosphorescent dopant (Lin [0018]). Lin specifically points to emitting materials such iridium complexes comprising ligands as shown below (Lin [0094]) or platinum complexes such as those shown below (Lin [0098]) each of which can optionally include one or more Deuterium atoms. Lin further teaches that devices incorporating these materials in the light emitting layer significantly improves overall device performance (Lin [00015]).
PNG
media_image1.png
152
100
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
156
224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In light of the motivation of using the emitting layer materials of Lin as described above, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the emitting layer materials as described by Lin in order to substantially improve overall device performance and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
For Claim 1: The emission layer meets the requirements of an emission layer and the hole transport layer 1 meets the requirements of a first layer that is an m-EBL comprising two components and wherein condition ii is met with HTL 2 to be the CGL with a dopant.
For Claim 3: The electron transport layer meets the requirements of a m-ETL that comprises 3 components.
For Claim 6: Either host can be a hole transport host or electron transport host and the dopant reads on an emitter.
For Claim 7: Any material of the EML meets the acceptor requirement.
For Claim 8: The three host materials and the dopant read on a sensitizer, acceptor, hole and electron transport hosts.
For Claim 9: Reads on wherein m-EBL comprises two materials that could be hole or electron transporting.
For Claim 10: Reads on three hosts and a phosphorescent emitter.For Claim 15: Several layers include such materials.
For Claim 12: Reads on Ir or Pt.
For Claim 13: Reads on a phosphorescent emitter.
For Claim 14: Reads on a deuterium.
For Claim 15: Reads on a carbazole moiety at least.
For Claim 16: Reads on the first structure.
For Claim 17: Reads on the first structure.
For Claim 18: Reads on either the first structure or
PNG
media_image3.png
140
200
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
For Claim 19: Reads on a deuterium atom.
For Claim 20: Reads on a display device.
For Claim 23: Reads on wherein the device comprises a charge generation layer.
Claims 1, 6-10, 12-22 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forrest et al (US 2017/0104172) (Forrest) in view of Lin (US 2020/00168818).
In reference to claim 1, 7, 12-13, 15-16, 18, 20-22 and 25, Forrest teaches a device as shown in figure 5, left, comprising a mixed electron blocking layer of CZSi and Tris-PCz, a hole transport layer of NPD, a hole injection layer of HATCN, an emission layer, a hole blocking layer of mCBP, an electron transport layer of Alq3, an electron injection layer of LiQ between an anode and a cathode that reads on the instant claims (Forrest Fig. 5, [0081]).
PNG
media_image4.png
591
711
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Forrest further teaches that the materials used in examples are provided as non-limiting examples and that other materials can be used including mixtures of hosts and dopants as emission layer materials (Forrest [0049]) but does not expressly teach the claimed emitting layers comprising 3 host materials and a phosphorescent material.
With respect to the difference, Lin teaches OLED devices comprising emitting layers including three host materials and a phosphorescent dopant (Lin [0018]). Lin specifically points to emitting materials such iridium complexes comprising ligands as shown below (Lin [0094]) or platinum complexes such as those shown below (Lin [0098]) each of which can optionally include one or more Deuterium atoms. Lin further teaches that devices incorporating these materials in the light emitting layer significantly improves overall device performance (Lin [00015]).
PNG
media_image1.png
152
100
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
156
224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In light of the motivation of using the emitting layer materials of Lin as described above, it would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the emitting layer materials as described by Lin in order to substantially improve overall device performance and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
For Claim 1: The emission layer meets the requirements of an emission layer and the mixed electron blocking meets the requirements of a first layer that is an m-EBL comprising two components and wherein condition i is met.
For Claim 6: Either host can be a hole transport host or electron transport host and the dopant reads on an emitter.
For Claim 7: Any material of the EML meets the acceptor requirement.
For Claim 8: The three host materials and the dopant read on a sensitizer, acceptor, hole and electron transport hosts.
For Claim 9: Reads on wherein m-EBL comprises two materials that could be hole or electron transporting.
For Claim 10: Reads on three hosts and a phosphorescent emitter.
For Claim 12: Reads on Ir or Pt.
For Claim 13: Reads on a phosphorescent emitter.
For Claim 14: Reads on a deuterium.
For Claim 15: Reads on a carbazole moiety at least.
For Claim 16: Reads on the first structure.
For Claim 17: Reads on the first structure.
For Claim 18: Reads on either the first structure or
PNG
media_image3.png
140
200
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
For Claim 19: Reads on a deuterium atom.
For Claim 20: Reads on a display device.
For Claim 21: Reads on wherein the mEBL does not have the same materials as in the HTL.
For Claim 25: Reads on wherein the mEBL does not have the same materials as in the HTL and wherein the EML comprises four components that can meet the claimed requirements.
In reference to claim 20, Forrest in view of Lin teaches the device as described above for claim 1. Forrest further teaches that the device is useful for a variety of electronic components including displays and lighting devices etc. (Forrest [0053]). It would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the instant application to have used the device as taught in Forrest in the application as expressly taught by Forest with the anticipation of providing a functional display or lighting device.
In reference to claim 22, Forrest teaches the device as described above for claim 1. Forrest does not expressly teach what the triplet energies are for the various materials used therein. However, Forrest does teach that such materials can be selected from among known materials for use in OLED devices (See e.g. [0056]). Further, Forrest teaches the blocking layer materials should have a tripet energy that is preferably greater than that of the emissive material (Forrest [0018]) and specifically at least 0.3 eV greater (Forrest [0059]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Spindler does not teach a doped charge generation layer as claimed. However, the layer has no positional or specific structural requirements and any doped layer in the device of Spindler can meet the claim limitation. Therefore, as set forth above herein, the device of Spindler still meets the claim requirement.
Similarly, Applicant argues that Forrest does not teach the mixed host materials as instantly claimed. However these emission layer compositions are well known in the art and provide known benefits as set forth above herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean M DeGuire whose telephone number is (571)270-1027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer A. Boyd can be reached 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.
/Sean M DeGuire/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786