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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Applicant's amendment of claim 1 and cancellation of claim 6 in “Claims - 01/23/2026” with “Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject - 01/23/2026”, have been acknowledged by Examiner.
This office action consider claims 1-5 and 7-20 pending for prosecution, wherein claims 9-13 and 15-16 are withdrawn from further consideration, and claims 1-5, 7-8, 14, and 17-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (100; Fig 3A; [0063]) = (element 100; Figure No. 3A; Paragraph No. [0063]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
1. Claims 1-5, 7, 14, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al. (US 20220209131 A1; hereinafter Yu).
Regarding claim 1, Yu teaches a light-emitting device (see the entire document, specifically Fig. 1+; [0013+], and as cited below), comprising:
a first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]);
a second electrode (364; Fig. 5; [0221]) facing the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]); and
an interlayer (362; Fig. 5; [0218]) between the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]) and the second electrode (364; Fig. 5; [0221]) and comprising an emission layer (470; Fig. 5; see [0220]), an electron transport layer (434; Fig. 5; see [0222]), a first layer (442; Fig. 5; [0224, 0267]; p-type dopant) a p-dopant and a second layer (482; Fig. 5; [0275]); n-type) comprising an n-dopant,
wherein the electron transport layer (434; see [0222]) is between the emission layer (470; see [0220]) and the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]),
the first layer (442; Fig. 5; [0224, 0267]; p-type dopant) and the second layer (482; Fig. 5; [0275]); n-type) are between the electron transport layer (434; see [0222]) and the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]),
the first layer (442; Fig. 5; [0224, 0267]; p-type dopant) is in direct contact with the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]),and
the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]) is a reflective electrode.
Regarding claim 2, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein the first electrode ((360; Fig. 5; [0217]) comprises indium tin oxide (ITO), indium zinc oxide (IZO), tin oxide (SnO2), zinc oxide (ZnO), or any combination thereof (see [0217]; ITO).
Regarding claim 3, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217])) comprises magnesium (Mg), silver (Ag), aluminum (Al), aluminum-lithium (Al-Li), calcium (Ca), magnesium-indium (Mg-In), magnesium-silver (Mg-Ag), or any combination thereof (see [0217]; Ag).
Regarding claim 4, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein the first electrode (360; Fig. 5; [0217]) is a cathode, the second electrode (364; Fig. 5; [0221]) is an anode, and the light-emitting device further comprises a hole transport region (460; Fig. 5; see [0268]; where 460 comprises of hole transporting material) between the second electrode (364; Fig. 5; [0221]) and the emission layer (470; Fig. 5; see [0220]), the hole transport region (460; Fig. 5; see [0268]; where 460 comprises of hole transporting material) comprising a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an electron blocking layer (464; Fig. 5; see [0226]), or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 5, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein the first layer (442; Fig. 5; [0224, 0267]; p-type dopant) and the second layer (482; Fig. 5; [0275]); n-type) are in contact with each other.
Regarding claim 7, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein the second layer (482; Fig. 5; [0275]); n-type) is in contact with the electron transport layer (434; Fig. 5; see [0222]).
Regarding claim 14, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein a concentration of the p-dopant (442; Fig. 5; [0224, 0267, 0270]; p-type dopant) is in a range of 0.5 wt% to 30 wt% (see [0270] in view of [0267]; HIL 442 includes the compound in Formula 7-1, e.g., a hole injection material. and further includes one of the compounds in Formula 9 as a p-type dopant; in the HIL 442, a weight ratio of the first hole injection material to the second hole injection material can be 8:2, where the second hole injection {i.e. the p-dopant) is 25%).
Regarding claim 17, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein a concentration of the n-dopant (482; Fig. 5; [0275, 0279]); n-type) is in a range of 0.5 wt% to 20 wt% (see [0279]).
Regarding claim 18, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein a thickness of the first layer (442; Fig. 5; [0224, 0267]; p-type dopant) is in a range of 10 A to 300 A (see [0270]).
Regarding claim 20, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein an electronic apparatus ([Abstract, 0002-0004, 0348]) comprising the light-emitting device of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1, above).
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 of this title, 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.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (30A; Fig 2B; [0128]) = (element 30A; Figure No. 2B; Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
2. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (US 20220209131 A1; hereinafter Yu), in view of Lee et al. (US 20140167001 A1; hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 8, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein a thickness of the electron transport layer (434; Fig. 5; see [0222]) (see below for “is in a range of 100 A to 600 A”).
As noted above, Yu does not expressly disclose “wherein a thickness of the electron transport layer is in a range of 100 A to 600 A”.
However, in the analogous art, Lee teaches an organic light emitting diode ([0003]), wherein (Fig. 1+; [0019+]) electron transport layer (150; [0034]) has a thickness of 1 to 50 nm. Here, the electron transport layer 150 with a thickness of 1 nm or greater has an advantage of preventing the deterioration of electron transport characteristics, and the electron transport layer with a thickness of 150 nm or smaller has an advantage of preventing the increase of driving voltage, which may be caused in order to improve the movement of electrons when the electron transport layer 150 is too thick.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the thickness of Yu’s electron transport layer with the thickness of Lee’s electron transport layer, and thereby, modified Yu’s (by Lee) device will have wherein a thickness of the electron transport layer (Yu 434; Fig. 5; see [0222] in view of the thickness of Lee 150; [0034]) is in a range of 100 A to 600 A (in view of the thickness of Lee 150; [0034]; where some of the values in a range of 1 nm to 50 nm, specifically 10 nm to 50 nm, is within the claimed range of 100 A to 600 A)
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yu in the manner set forth above, at least, because this inclusion provides an electron transport layer with a thickness range of 1 nm to 50 nm, where a thickness of 1 nm or greater has an advantage of preventing the deterioration of electron transport characteristics, and the electron transport layer with a thickness of 150 nm or smaller has an advantage of preventing the increase of driving voltage (Lee [0034]).
3. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (US 20220209131 A1; hereinafter Yu), in view of the following.
Regarding claim 19, Yu teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Yu further teaches wherein a thickness of the second layer (482; Fig. 5; [0275]); n-type) is in a range of 10 A to 150 A (see [0279]; where some of the values from a thickness range of 30 A to 500 A, specifically 30 A to 150 A, are within the claimed range; see MPEP § 2144.05.I), in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05, I.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment” on 01/23/2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive, because of the following: the Applicant's amendment of claim 1 necessitated the shift in new grounds of rejection detailed in sections above. The shift in grounds of rejection renders the Applicant's arguments moot.
Please see the analysis of rejection for claims above.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Omar Mojaddedi whose telephone number is 313-446-6582. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m..
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, Julio J. Maldonado, can be reached on 571-272-1864. 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.
/OMAR F MOJADDEDI/Examiner, Art Unit 2898