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 1-20 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 15, the limitation (1) “providing, on the emission layer, an inorganic electron transport layer comprising a metal oxide; providing, on the inorganic electron transport layer comprising the metal oxide, an electron injection layer comprising Sc, Y, Ce, Tb, Yb, Gd, or any combination thereof” in combination with the amended limitation (2) “providing an anti-oxidation layer directly on the inorganic electron transport layer” as a whole would raise a new matter issue since the specification of the instant applicant does not fully and clearly disclose such limitation with reasons as follow:
For the limitation (1) above, the specification may provide support that an inorganic electron transport layer of an electron transport region 136 is provided on an emission layer 135 (paragraphs 30 and 214-216 including “providing, on the emission layer, an inorganic electron transport layer including a metal oxide”); an electron injection layer of the electron transport region 136 is provided on the electron transport layer of the electron transport region 136 (paragraphs 232-235 at least including “The electron transport region may include an electron injection layer that facilitates the injection of electrons from the second electrode 150. The electron injection layer may be in direct contact with the second electrode 150” and “The are earth metal may include Sc, Y, Ce, Tb, Yb, Gd, or any combination thereof”). Then, the specification would not provide support for the amended limitation (2) above since the electron injection layer is positioned between the anti-oxidation layer 140 and the inorganic electron transport layer, preventing from the anti-oxidation layer 140 directly contacting the inorganic electron transport layer [underlying for clarity].
For the amended limitation (2) above, the specification may provide support if the electron transport region 136 is expressly a single-layered structure consisting of a single layer consisting of an inorganic electron transport layer formed of a metal oxide (See Fig. 1 and paragraphs 214-216). Then, the anti-oxidation layer 140 could be directly contacting the electron transport region 136 having the single-layered structure consisting of the single layer consisting of the inorganic electron transport layer. However, the specification would not further provide support for the limitation (1) above since the limitation (1) requires forming the electron injection layer between the inorganic electron transport layer and the anti-oxidation layer 140 as discussed above for the limitation (1). Furthermore, one skilled in the art would also recognize, after review of paragraphs 214-242 from the instant application, that the electron injection layer is positioned between the inorganic electron transport layer and the anti-oxidation layer 140. Accordingly, the limitations (1) and (2) together as discussed above would raise the new matter issue.
Claim 1 similarly reciting the limitation (1) “a middle region comprising an emission layer between the first electrode and the second electrode, an electron transport region between the second electrode and the emission layer, and an electron injection layer between the second electrode and the electron transport region; and an anti-oxidation layer between the second electrode and the electron transport region” in combination with the amended limitation (2) “wherein the anti-oxidation layer directly contacts the electron transport region” as a whole would also raise a new matter issue with the similar reason for rejecting claim 15 as discussed above. It is further noted that the term “an electron transport region” in claim 1 should be properly considered as an electron transport layer of an electron transport region 136 similar to claim 15 reciting “an inorganic electron transport layer” with the specification disclosing that the electron transport region 136 have a multi-layered structure of an electron transport layer and an electron injection layer (See Fig. 1 and paragraphs 214-216).
Dependent claims 2-14 and 16-20, which depend from claims 1 and 15, are also rejected by virtue of their dependencies.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 1 and 15 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as set forth above in this Office Action.
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