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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/10/2025 has been entered.
Summary of Claims
Claim 1 is amended due to Applicant's amendment dated 12/10/2025. Claims 1-19 are pending.
Response to Amendment
The rejection of claims 1-14 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang (US 2016/0141517 A1) is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 12/10/2025. The rejection is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 15-16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 12/10/2025. The rejection is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 15 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Ito (US 2016/0072077 A1) is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 12/10/2025. The rejection is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 15 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Kim (US 2014/0014927 A1) is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 12/10/2025. The rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Insofar as the arguments apply to the new grounds of rejection below, Applicant’s arguments on page 10 of the reply dated 12/10/2025 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-19 as set forth in the previous Office Action have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's argument –On page 10, Applicant argues claim 1 is amended to exclude Yang’s Compound E and thus the prior art fails to read on the amended claims.
Examiner's response –While the amended claim 1 excludes Compound E of Yang, the newly cited reference Kim (US 2021/0313519 A1) teaches compound EH-60 which reads on the claimed formula (Ib) as described in greater detail below. Accordingly, the cited reference reads on the amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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)(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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2021/0313519 A1).
Regarding claims 1-12, Kim teaches an organic light emitting diode having improved luminous efficiency and life by comprising an organic compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 (abstract; ¶ [0017] and [0073]). Examples of compounds represented by Chemical Formula 1 include EH-60 (pg. 20).
EH-60:
PNG
media_image1.png
299
209
media_image1.png
Greyscale
formula (Ib):
PNG
media_image2.png
283
287
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compound EH-60 reads on the claimed formula (Ib) wherein:
R1b to R8b and R13b are each hydrogen (claims 2-4);
R9b and R10b are each hydrogen, as the instant specification recites hydrogen includes deuterium (see instant ¶ [0045]) (claims 5-7);
R11b is hydrogen (claims 8-11);
Xb1 to Xb3 each represent N;
Yb represents S;
n is 2;
q and r are each 5;
p is 4; and
s is 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 13-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2021/0313519 A1).
Regarding claims 13-14 and 19, Kim teaches compound EH-60 as described above with respect to claim 1.
Kim fails to specifically teach an example of a device comprising EH-60. However, Kim does teach examples of devices including Example 1 which includes an anode, a hole injection layer, an emitting layer including a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1, an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode (¶ [0228]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use compound EH-60 in a device having the structure of Example 1 wherein EH-60 is provided in the emitting layer, because this would have been combining the prior art elements of Kim according to known methods to yield predictable results of an organic light emitting diode having improved luminous efficiency and life, as taught by Kim. See MPEP 2143.I.(A).
Regarding claim 19, although the instant claim is drawn to an electronic equipment, the only positive limitation of the claimed electronic equipment is the organic electroluminescence device of claim 13. Claim 19 does not add any further structural or functional limitations to the device and/or compound. Kim teaches the OLED according to claim 13, as described above, and does not include any components that would make it unfit for use as electronic equipment. Therefore, the OLED of Kim according to claim 13 may be considered electronic equipment.
Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2021/0313519 A1) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Ito (US 2016/0072077 A1).
Regarding claims 15 and 17, Kim teaches the device including compound EH-60, as described above with respect to claim 14.
EH-60:
PNG
media_image1.png
299
209
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While Kim teaches the device may include a hole blocking layer (¶ [0054]), Kim fails to teach the device further includes a hole blocking layer and fails to teach compound EH-60 is provided in the hole blocking layer.
Ito teaches an organic light emitting element having improved carrier balance, efficiency and life span by including sequentially an emission layer, a hole blocking layer, and an electron transfer (transport) layer, wherein a first compound represented by one of Chemical Formula 1-A to Chemical Formula 1-G is included in the hole blocking layer and a second compound represented by Chemical Formula 2 is included in the emission layer (abstract; ¶ [0013] and [0097]).
Chemical Formula 1-A:
PNG
media_image3.png
112
242
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kim’s compound EH-60 reads on Ito’s Chemical Formula 1-A wherein: A1 includes a deuterium-substituted C6 aromatic hydrocarbon group; L1 includes an unsubstituted C12 aromatic hydrocarbon group and a substituted C3 aromatic heterocyclic group; X is S; each R1 is hydrogen; and p is 4 and q is 2 (see Ito, ¶ [0036] and [0086]-[0094]).
Therefore, in Kim’s device it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: further include a hole blocking layer between the emitting layer and the electron transport layer; provide compound EH-60 in the hole blocking layer; and further provide a compound represented by Ito’s Chemical Formula 2 in the emitting layer, based on the teaching of Ito. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a device with having improved carrier balance, efficiency and life span, as taught by Ito.
Claims 15-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2021/0313519 A1) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Kim ‘927 (US 2014/0014927 A1).
Regarding claims 15-16 and 18, Kim teaches the device including compound EH-60, as described above with respect to claim 14.
EH-60:
PNG
media_image1.png
299
209
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim fails to teach compound EH-60 is provided in the electron transport layer, and fails to teach the electron transport layer further includes an alkali metal.
Kim ‘927 teaches an organic light emitting device comprising an electron transport layer including a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 and an alkali metal complex (abstract). Such devices have high efficiency and long life-span characteristics (¶ [0007]-[0008]).
Chemical Formula 1:
PNG
media_image4.png
127
150
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Compound EH-60 reads on Chemical Formula 1 of Kim ‘927 wherein: X is nitrogen; L1 and L2 are each a single bond and L3 is an unsubstituted C12 arylene group; R1 and R2 are each a substituted C6 aryl group, and R3 is an unsubstituted C18 heteroaryl group (see Kim ‘927, ¶ [0008]-[0012]).
Therefore, in Kim’s device it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide compound EH-60 in the electron transport layer and to further provide an alkali metal complex in the electron transport layer, based on the teaching of Kim ‘927. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a device having high efficiency and long life-span characteristics, as taught by Kim ‘927.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRAELYN R WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-5pm.
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.
/BRAELYN R WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights