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 .
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.
While the Specification provides which are encompassed by claim 1 requirements, the examples do not demonstrate that Applicant has possession for the full scope of claims 1 and 19 and the dependent claims.
Claims 1 and 19 does not provide any structural limitations materials of the first material emitting layers and second material emitting layers.
Claims 1 and 19 does not provide any structural limitations materials of the first compound of the first electron transporting layer. Claim 1 does not provide any structural limitations for the second compound and the n-type dopant of the n-type charge generation layer. The first compound and the second compound are only limited by the LUMO values.
The specification while showing materials/compounds is broad regarding any guidance on structures or formulae that would be within the broad scope of the limits of claims 1 and 19.
A claim written in such a manner results in a scope for a combination of generic materials that would extend beyond the material requirements supported in the Specification.
The limited examples described in the written description does not provide a representative number of species sufficient to show that Applicant was in possession of the claimed genus (see MPEP 2163-11-A-3-a-ii).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-6 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (US 2016/0043327).
Regarding Claims 1 and 18, Yoo teaches an organic light emitting display device includes at least two light emitting parts each including a light emitting layer and an electron transport layers, and at least one charge generation layer between the light emitting parts, wherein at least one among the charge generation layer or the electron transport layer includes a compound having nitrogen atoms and a substituent for enhancing electron mobility (abstract). The charge generation layer includes an N-type charge generation layer and a P-type charge generation layer (paragraph 9). The charge generation layer 160 may be a PN-junction charge generation layer formed by joining an N-type charge generation layer 160N and a P-type charge generation layer 160P (paragraph 72).
The OLED scheme is shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
494
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
966
1078
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
304
1062
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
156
1066
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
174
1058
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
376
1056
media_image6.png
Greyscale
The above shows device layering reading applicants’ layers including the first and second emitting part between an anode and a cathode.
Yoo fails to mention the LUMO difference in the N-type charge generation layer material and the electron transport layer material. The first electron transport layer 150 includes a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1. The compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 is an electron transport compound represented by any one among the following Chemical Formulas 6 to 13. The electron transport compound includes a phenanthroline derivative and a triphenyl derivative. A specific example of Chemical Formula 1 is represented by NC25 (page 8):
PNG
media_image7.png
256
420
media_image7.png
Greyscale
The office notes that NC25 is identical to applicants’ A-01.
Compounds for the N-type charge generation layer 160N are represented by the following Chemical Formula 1 (paragraph 74) which is represented by Chemical NC11 (page 7):
PNG
media_image8.png
216
416
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The office notes the NC11 is identical to applicants’ B-10
As Yoo does not teaches an unexpected results associated with the functional differences between the exemplified examples of the N-type charge generation layer compounds, one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have selected from the examples shown by Yoo for the first electron transport layer compound and the N-type charge generation layer compound including the above NC25 and NC11, absent unexpected results.
As NC25 and NC11 are identical to applicants’ first electron transport layer compound and the N-type charge generation layer compound, NC25 and NC11 would inherently meet the LUMO energy and range difference requirements (per claim 1).
The first light emitting part ST1 is a single light emitting diode unit, and comprises a first light emitting layer 140. The first light emitting layer 140 may emit light at least one among red, green, or blue (paragraph 61) (per claim 18).
Regarding Claims 2-3 and 19, Yoo teaches applicants’ first compound as NC25 (above) which reads on applicants’ Formula 1 wherein a = 1; L1 = phenylene; X1-X3 = N; Ar1 and Ar2 = phenyl (per claims 2 and 19). The office notes that NC25 is identical to applicants’ A-01 (per claim 3).
Regarding Claims 4-6 and 20, Yoo teaches applicants’ second compound as NC11 which reads on applicants’ Formula 3 wherein b = 1; L2 = naphthylene; Ar3 = phenanthrenyl (per claims 4 and 20 ). NC11 is identical to applicants’ B-10 (per claims 5).
The dopant for the N-type charge generation layer is an alkali metal or alkali earth metal (paragraph 73) [ include L1 and Cs)(per claim 6).
wherein the first compound and the hole blocking material are same or different (per claim 14)
wherein the second emitting part further includes a hole transporting layer positioned under the second emitting material layer and contacting the p-type charge generation layer, and wherein the hole transporting layer includes a hole transporting material represented by Formula 5 (per claim 15)
wherein the third compound and the hole transporting material are same or different (per claim 16)
wherein the third compound and the hole transporting material are same or different. 17. The organic light emitting diode according to claim 15, wherein a difference between a LUMO energy level of the hole transporting material and the LUMO energy level of the third compound is 0 to about 0.2eV (per claim 17)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY D CLARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7087. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-4PM M-F.
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 Chriss can be reached on 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 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.
/GREGORY D CLARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786