DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to because the "FIG. 1" label of the single viewing cannot appear in the sheet. See 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The Specification refers to the single view drawing as "FIG. 1.” However, all instances of "FIG. 1" should be replaced by "The FIGURE" or "the FIGURE" as numbered abbreviations are not allowed as there is only one single viewing. See 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1). Furthermore, the “FIG. 1” label in the Drawings should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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.
6. Claim 12 is 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.
The claim, which depends on Claim 1, recites “99.9 to 90 wt% of the hosts and 0.1 to 10 wt% of the light-emitting dopant are contained” which renders the exact scope of claim indefinite as it is not clear the weight percentage references of the hosts and dopant materials in the device. The Office has interpreted the weight percentages to refer to percentages of the “at least one of the light emitting layers” for the purpose this Examination.
Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-6 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa et al. (WO 2018/198844 A1) in view of Hatakeyama et al. (WO 2018/212169 A1).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on national phase publication US 2021/0143340 A1 as the English equivalent of WIPO publication WO 2018/198844 A1 (herein referred to as “Ogawa et al.”). Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the national phase publication.
The Office has relied on national phase publication US 2020/0190115 A1 as the English equivalent of WIPO publication WO 2018/212169 A1 (herein referred to as “Hatakeyama et al.”). Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the national phase publication.
Ogawa et al. discloses the following organic electroluminescent (EL) device:
PNG
media_image1.png
494
812
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Fig. 1) comprising substrate (1), anode (2), hole-injecting layer (3), hole-transporting layer (4), light-emitting layer (5), electron-transporting layer (6), and cathode (7) (Fig. 1; [0053]); at least one of a plurality of light-emitting layers comprises a first host of formula (1), a second host of formula (2), and dopant material (Abstract; [0032]). The weight proportion of the first host is from 20-60%, including 40-50% ([0051]). Dopant materials include fluorescent materials, including thermally activated delayed fluorescence materials at 0.1-20 wt% (including 1-10 wt%) relative to the weight of host materials ([0072]). Ogawa et al. discloses the following embodiments for the first and second hosts, respectively:
PNG
media_image2.png
348
386
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 5) (second host) such that f = 1, Z3 = formula (3a) (with h = i = 0 and ring A = formula (3b) (with j = 0 and L31 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl))), L3 = substituted aromatic heterocyclic group having 3 carbon atoms (substituted triazinylene), g = 1, and Ar3 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 12 carbon atoms (biphenyl) of Applicant’s formula (3) and
PNG
media_image3.png
460
360
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 29) (first host) such that a = b = 0, Ar1 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 12 carbon atoms (biphenyl), and Y1 = N-Ar1 (with Ar1 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl)) of Applicant’s formulae (1) and (7). However, Ogawa et al. does not explicitly disclose a dopant as recited in Claim 1.
Hatakeyama et al. discloses the following (thermally activated delayed fluorescent) light-emitting material for use in the light-emitting layer (comprising host and dopant materials) of an organic EL device, the use of which results in a device with high efficiency and long lifetime (Abstract; [0161]-[0162], [0165]):
PNG
media_image4.png
276
490
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(page 299) (light emitting dopant) with a ΔEST = 0.02 eV and capable of achieving high efficiency and deep blue color ([0564]-[0565]) such that Y4 = B, X4 = N-Ar4 (with Ar4 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), v = 0, x = 1, R42 = diarylamino group having 12 carbon atoms (diphenylamino), and rings C-E = aromatic hydrocarbon ring having 6 carbon atoms (benzene) of Applicant’s formula (4) as a partial structure; v = w = z = 0, x = y = 1, R42 = diarylamino group having 12 carbon atoms (diphenylamino), Y4 = B, X4 = N-Ar4 (with Ar4 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl)), rings F-J = aromatic hydrocarbon ring having 6 carbon atoms (benzene) of Applicant’s formula (5); l = 1, R6 = diarylamino group having 12 carbon atoms (diphenylamino), m = k = 0, and X6 = N-Ar6 (with Ar6 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl)) of Applicant’s formula (6). It would have been obvious to incorporate compound (1-1) as disclosed by Hatakeyama et al. (above) into the light-emitting layer of the organic EL device as disclosed by Ogawa et al. (as dopant material). The motivation is provided by the disclosure of Hatakeyama et al. which teaches that the use of its inventive compounds in such a manner results in a device with high efficiency and long lifetime.
10. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa et al. (WO 2018/198844 A1) in view of Hatakeyama et al. (WO 2018/212169 A1) as applied above and in further view of Lee et al. (KR 10-2015-0105201).
Examiner’s Note: The Office has relied on national phase publication US 2021/0143340 A1 as the English equivalent of WIPO publication WO 2018/198844 A1 (herein referred to as “Ogawa et al.”). Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the national phase publication.
The Office has relied on national phase publication US 2020/0190115 A1 as the English equivalent of WIPO publication WO 2018/212169 A1 (herein referred to as “Hatakeyama et al.”). Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the national phase publication.
The Office has relied on the Machine English translation of foreign document publication KR 10-2015-0105201 (herein referred to as “Lee et al.”) as the English equivalent. Unless otherwise noted, all figure, page, and paragraph numbers referenced herein refer to numbers found in the Machine English translation.
Ogawa et al. in view of Hatakeyama et al. discloses the organic electroluminescent (EL) device of Claim 1 as shown above. Ogawa et al. discloses at least one of a plurality of light-emitting layers comprises its host materials and dopant material (Abstract; [0032]). However, Ogawa et al. in view of Hatakeyama et al. does not explicitly disclose a first host of Applicant’s formula (2).
Lee et al. discloses the following compound:
PNG
media_image5.png
100
170
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(page 109) (first host) such that d = 0 or 1, L2 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), Ar2 = hydrogen, e = 0 or 1, and R2 = unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms (phenyl) of Applicant’s formula (2). Lee et al. discloses its inventive compounds as fluorescent host material in the light-emitting layer of an organic EL device ([0159]-[0160], [0170], [0179]); the use results in a device with excellent luminous efficiency and color purity ([0001]). It would have been obvious to incorporate 1 as disclosed by Lee et al. (above) into any one of the other plurality of the light-emitting layers in the organic EL device as disclosed by Ogawa et al. in view of Hatakeyama et al. (as host material). The motivation is provided by the disclosure of Lee et al. which teaches that the use of its inventive compounds in such a manner results in a device with excellent luminous efficiency and color purity.
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1137. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6am-3pm.
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.
/JAY YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights