DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-10, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” would raise a new matter issue since the specification of the instant application does not fully and clearly describe such limitation to comply with the written description requirement.
The specification of the instant application discloses that the electron transporting layer 54 includes a compound of a first metal such as zinc oxide, magnesium zinc oxide, aluminum zinc oxide, tin oxide, and titanium oxide (see paragraph 20 disclosing “a material of the electron transporting layer includes a compound of a first metal” and paragraph 82 disclosing “The electron transporting layer 54 is mainly used for the transmission of the electrons, and its material may include but is not limited to zinc oxide, magnesium zinc oxide, aluminium zinc oxide, tin oxide and titanium oxide” and paragraph 142 disclosing “depositing a ZnO nanoparticle as the material of the electron transporting layer…to complete the fabrication of the electron transporting layer 54”). In other words, the specification discloses that the electron transporting layer 54 is formed of inorganic metal oxide compound and the specification would not convey to one skilled in the art that the electron transporting layer 54 comprises an organic metal compound such as “diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” as claimed. Accordingly, the limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” would raise the new matter issue. Claims 2, 7-10, and 13-17, which depend from claim 1, are also rejected by virtue of their dependencies.
Regarding claim 17, the limitation “wherein the material of the electron transporting layer and the material of the additional component doped in the luminescent layer are the same one material” in combination with the limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” would raise a new matter issue since the specification of the instant application does not fully and clearly describe such limitation to comply with the written description requirement.
While the specification discloses that the additional component 13 comprises “at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” (see paragraphs 60 and 72-74), the specification does not further discloses that the electron transporting layer 54 also comprises “at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” as claimed (see the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as discussed above). Accordingly, the limitation “wherein the material of the electron transporting layer and the material of the additional component doped in the luminescent layer are the same one material” in combination with the limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” would raise the new matter issue.
Response to Arguments
It is noted that amended claim 1 and newly submitted claim 17 filed 08/25/2026 have been considered, but are rejected in view of different grounds of rejections as set forth above in this Office Action.
Furthermore, Applicant's additional arguments filed 08/25/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement, also have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with reasons as follow:
Applicant argues that paragraphs 103-104 support the limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” since paragraphs 103-104 discloses “the electron transporting layer 54 includes a compound of a first metal” (Remarks, pages 1-4). However, this is not persuasive since Applicant fails to provide full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the art that the inventor or a joint inventor had possession of the claimed limitation. Specifically, Applicant’s cited paragraphs 103-104 in the specification do not disclose the claimed limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms [underlying for clarity]. Furthermore, with the specification disclosing that the electron transporting layer 54 is formed of inorganic metal oxide as examples (paragraph 82 disclosing “The electron transporting layer 54 is mainly used for the transmission of the electrons, and its material may include but is not limited to zinc oxide, magnesium zinc oxide, aluminium zinc oxide, tin oxide and titanium oxide” and paragraph 142 disclosing “depositing a ZnO nanoparticle as the material of the electron transporting layer…to complete the fabrication of the electron transporting layer 54”), the specification would not convey to one skilled in the art that the electron transporting layer 54 including “a compound of a first metal” in paragraphs 103-104 would also include an organic compound such as “at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” as claimed. As such, the rejection of claim 1 with the limitation “a material of the electron transporting layer comprises at least one of diethyl zinc, dimethyl zinc, dibutyl zinc, diphenyl zinc, diethyl cadmium, dimethyl cadmium, dibutyl cadmium, and diphenyl cadmium” is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the 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 DANIEL B WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3418. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8AM-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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL WHALEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights