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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/14/2026 has been entered.
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 1-5, 8, 11-13, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 2004/022334) (Matsuura).
In reference to claims 1, 4-5, 11-13 and 24, Matsuura teaches the compound 1-5 as shown below that reads on the instant claimed compound (p. 13) in a device example 2-4 (Matsuura Table 2) comprising compound 1-5 and Alq3 in an electron transporting/electron injecting layer and an emission layer between electrodes as claimed and an example of a display device comprising the same (example 3). While Matsuura calls the layer an electron transporting/electron injecting layers (Matsuura [0083]) and not just an electron injection layer, the composition requirements are the same (a compound of claim 1 and a metal). It is further noted that the instant claims allow for the metal and the compound of formula 1 to mixed within the layer as an alternative to being in separate sublayers (Matsuura [0077]).
PNG
media_image1.png
254
328
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Matsuura further teaches that alternative metal materials can be used in the electron transport layer including copper materials (Matsuura [0076]).
While Matsuura does not exemplify a device with such alternate materials selected, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have selected taught functional equivalents for the electron transport layer materials as taught by Matsuura with the anticipation of providing a similarly functional device, in the absence of unexpected results.
For Claim 1: Reads on a device with the claimed structure including a first electrode, a second electrode, a light e mitting layer and the electron transport layer comprising a compound of formula G1 wherein X4 is N, X5 is N, X3 is CH, X6 is CH, R3 and R4 are each a phenyl group, Ar is a pyrimidine substituted with an aryl group.
For Claim 4: Reads on wherein the other is CH.
For Claims 5: Reads on pyrimidine substituted with phenyl.
For Claim 11: Reads on a Cu.
For Claims 12-13: Reads on an electronic or lighting device.
For Claim 24: Reads on at least three possible coordination positions.
In reference to claims 2-3 and 8, Matsuura teaches a compound of formula (1) as shown below.
PNG
media_image2.png
170
266
media_image2.png
Greyscale
for example, wherein in the formula (1), each of Ar1, Ar2 and Ar3 are a pyrimidine, and each of Ar11 to Ar13 are phenyl (Matsuura [0042]).
Matsuura discloses the compound of formula (1) that encompasses the presently claimed compound of formula G1, including wherein in the formula (1), each of Ar1, Ar2 and Ar3 are a pyrimidine, and each of Ar11 to Ar13 are phenyl. Each of the disclosed substituents from the substituent groups of Matsuura are considered functionally equivalent and their selection would lead to obvious variants of the compound of formula (1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application, in the absence of unexpected results, to have selected these substituents among those disclosed for the compound of formula (1) to provide the compound described above, which is both disclosed by Matsuura and encompassed within the scope of the present claims and thereby arrive at the claimed invention.
Matsuura further teaches example device structures such as 2-4 (Matsuura Table 2) comprising these compounds and metals such as Alq3 in an electron transporting/electron injecting layer and an emission layer between electrodes as claimed and an example of a display device comprising the same (example 3). While Matsuura calls the layer an electron transporting/electron injecting layers (Matsuura [0083]) and not just an electron injection layer, the composition requirements are the same (a compound of claim 1 and a metal). It is further noted that the instant claims allow for the metal and the compound of formula 1 to be at variable concentrations within the ‘layer’ and that in the art it is common for a ‘layer’ to comprise multiple sublayers (Matsuura [0077]).
Matsuura further teaches that alternative metal materials can be used in the electron transport layer including copper materials (Matsuura [0076]).
While Matsuura does not exemplify a device with such alternate materials selected, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have selected taught functional equivalents for the electron transport layer materials as taught by Matsuura with the anticipation of providing a similarly functional device, in the absence of unexpected results.
For Claim 2: Reads on X3 is N and X6 is N.
For Claim 3: Reads on X4 is C bonded to phenyl, X5 is C bonded to phenyl, X3 is N and X6 is N.
For Claim 8: Reads on compound 105.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claims as amended are not taught by the prior art of record. This argument has been fully considered but not found convincing for at least the following reasons. Applicant argues that Matsuura does not mixtures of electron transport materials within a layer. However, Matsuura expressly teaches mixtures of taught electron transport materials within a layer or separation of such materials into sublayers as alternatives (Matsuura [0077]).
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
Prosecution Insights