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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 11/10/2022 and 11/10/2022 were filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 11/10/2022. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
In a requirement for election of species dated 10/31/2025, Applicant was required to choose from the species that make up the genus that is made up of the individual species of the compounds having the structure of instant ligand LA wherein the patentably distinct species are those with
One metal, M
One type of ring the two RE substituents form which is condensed to ring E, and
One ring of Formula II which is further coordinated to the metal, M
Applicant’s election without traverse of (a) iridium for metal, M, (b) a monocyclic 6-membered ring made of two RE substituents, (c) which is also the ring coordinated to metal, M, in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 6, 7, and 16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Please indicate these claims as [Withdrawn] in future correspondence in accordance with 37 CFR 1.121(c)(2). Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/08/2025.
The elected species is examined herein.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On the bottom of page 9 of the specification, Z1 is erroneously referred to as Z1. Please correct this.
PNG
media_image1.png
138
872
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The letters, numbers, and/or bonds in the chemical structure given on pages 56 (ligand LB263), 110 (hosts), 149 (H2, HTM, HATCM, ETM, and EBM), and 151 (HATCN, HTM, and ETM) are illegible. Please correct these structures so all letters, numbers, and/or bonds are clearly visible. See the example below.
PNG
media_image2.png
344
546
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Please note that this example is non-limiting and there may be other structures that require correction. Please check all formulae to make sure they are not unclear. Applicant may wish to make these structures clearer by increasing font size, making the font bold, and/or making the lines thicker.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Some of the letters, numbers, and/or bonds in the chemical structure given in claim 19 are illegible. Please correct these structures so all letters, numbers, and/or bonds are clearly visible. See the example below.
PNG
media_image3.png
430
660
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Please note that this example is non-limiting and there may be other structures that require correction. Please check all formulae to make sure they are not unclear. Applicant may wish to make these structures clearer by increasing font size, making the font bold, and/or making the lines thicker.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claim 6, formulae Ia through Ie contain variable Z1, however, this same variable is subsequently referred to as Z1 on line 3 of page 154 of the claims. It is unclear whether these characters refer to the same variable or whether independent variables Z1 and Z1 are supposed to be present.
In continuing examination, these will be interpreted as different characters which are meant to refer to the same variable and that a simple typographical error is present.
With respect to claim 19, the claim contains compounds made of chemical moieties not included in the list in claim 18. See below. For example.
PNG
media_image4.png
106
258
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This makes the metes and bounds of the claim unclear.
In continuing examination, claim 19 will be interpreted as
“19. The OLED of claim 17 [[18]], wherein the organic layer further comprises a host, wherein the host is selected from the group consisting of:--"
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
With respect to claim 19, the claim contains compounds made of chemical moieties not included in the list in claim 18. See below. For example.
PNG
media_image4.png
106
258
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1-4, 8, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kwon et al. (US 2022/0069237 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Kwon discloses compound 1 (paragraph 0145), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image5.png
378
484
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of proviso (1)(ii) of instant Formula I when moiety A is a monocyclic 6-membered heterocyclic ring (pyridine), moiety B is a monocyclic ring structure comprising a 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene), Z1 is nitrogen and Z2 is carbon, K1 and K2 are both a direct bond, and moiety B also comprises, and is fused to a structure of Formula II via two joined RE groups. In formula II, X1-X7 are carbon atoms, T’ is a nitrogen atom, RA, RC and RD are each hydrogen atoms and two RE are joined to form the benzene ring of moiety B which is coordinated to metal, M, and M is iridium.
With respect to claim 2, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 1, and RA, RC, and RD are each hydrogen atoms and RE is coordinated to metal M, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 3, Kwon teach the compound of claim 1, and M is iridium, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 4, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 1, and T’ is nitrogen, as discussed above.
With respect to claim 8, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 1, and the ligand LA has the structure of Formula IIa, wherein each of X1-X11 is carbon, as pictured above.
With respect to claims 11 and 12, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 1, and the compound has the formula Ir(LA)(LB)2 wherein p is 1 and q is 2 and 3 is the oxidation state of iridium, as pictured above.
With respect to claim 13, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 11, and LB has the formula below which is the fifth embodiment of the instant claim. LC is not present.
PNG
media_image6.png
178
124
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5, 9-10, 14-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2022/0069237 A1), as applied above.
With respect to claim 5, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 1, as discussed above.
Compound 1, pictured and discussed above is derived from Kwon formula 1A, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
412
524
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kwon also teaches that ring A1 is a C9 heterocyclic group (paragraph 0013), such as isoquinoline (paragraph 0054, line 3).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when two of RA are joined to form a ring fused to ring A.
Kwon includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kwon being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of an organometallic compound which, when used in an organic electronic device, such as an organic light-emitting device, results in low driving voltage, high efficiency, long lifespan, and reduced roll-off phenomenon (paragraph 0146), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 9, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 8, as discussed above.
Compound 1, pictured and discussed above is derived from Kwon formula 1A, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
412
524
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kwon also teaches that R10, R30, and R40 may be a C1 alkyl (methyl) group (paragraph 0078 and 0079 line 6).
Such a modification produces a ligand LA which has the structure of LAII11-(X2)(X2)(R1)(R1)(R1)(R1)
Kwon includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kwon being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of an organometallic compound which, when used in an organic electronic device, such as an organic light-emitting device, results in low driving voltage, high efficiency, long lifespan, and reduced roll-off phenomenon (paragraph 0146), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 10, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 8, as discussed above.
Compound 1, pictured and discussed above is derived from Kwon formula 1A, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
412
524
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kwon also teaches that R30 is a C4 alkyl (t-butyl) group (paragraph 0088 and formula 9-7).
Such a modification produces the instant fifth embodiment, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image8.png
202
146
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Kwon includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kwon being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of an organometallic compound which, when used in an organic electronic device, such as an organic light-emitting device, results in low driving voltage, high efficiency, long lifespan, and reduced roll-off phenomenon (paragraph 0146), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 14, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 12, as discussed above.
Compound 1, pictured and discussed above is derived from Kwon formula 1A, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
412
524
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kwon also teaches that R10, R30, and R40 may be a C1 alkyl (methyl) group (paragraph 0078 and 0079 line 6).
Such a modification produces the instant compound from LIST 4a which is defined by formula LAII11-(X2)(X2)(R1)(R1)(R1)(R1), and comprises ligand LB1. Ligand LC is not present.
Kwon includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kwon being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of an organometallic compound which, when used in an organic electronic device, such as an organic light-emitting device, results in low driving voltage, high efficiency, long lifespan, and reduced roll-off phenomenon (paragraph 0146), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 15, Kwon teaches the compound of claim 12, as discussed above.
Compound 1, pictured and discussed above is derived from Kwon formula 1A, which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image7.png
412
524
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Applicant will note that Kwon is non-limiting with regard to the bonding position about A2 and the rest of the polycyclic structure can be readily rotated.
Such a modification produces the instant embodiment below (page 232 of the instant claims).
PNG
media_image9.png
184
204
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Kwon includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kwon being a lack of the aforementioned combination being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from each of the finite lists of possible combinations to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of an organometallic compound which, when used in an organic electronic device, such as an organic light-emitting device, results in low driving voltage, high efficiency, long lifespan, and reduced roll-off phenomenon (paragraph 0146), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 17, Kwon teaches an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode (paragraph 0160), and an organic layer (paragraph 0164) and the organic layer comprises the inventive compound (paragraph 0159), such as compound 1 (paragraph 0145), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image5.png
378
484
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of proviso (1)(ii) of instant Formula I when moiety A is a monocyclic 6-membered heterocyclic ring (pyridine), moiety B is a monocyclic ring structure comprising a 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene), Z1 is nitrogen and Z2 is carbon, K1 and K2 are both a direct bond, and moiety B also comprises, and is fused to a structure of Formula II via two joined RE groups. In formula II, X1-X7 are carbon atoms, T’ is a nitrogen atom, RA, RC and RD are each hydrogen atoms and two RE are joined to form the benzene ring of moiety B which is coordinated to metal, M, and M is iridium.
Kwon teaches that when the organometallic compound represented by Formula I is included in an organic light-emitting device, the device exhibits excellent luminescence efficiency, lifespan, and color purity.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the compound in the organic layer of a device with the claimed device structure in order to obtain a device which exhibits excellent luminescence efficiency, lifespan, and color purity, as taught by Kwon.
With respect to 20, Kwon teaches a consumer product such as a full-color organic light emitting device (paragraph 0218) comprising an organic light emitting device comprising an anode, a cathode (paragraph 0160), and an organic layer (paragraph 0164) and the organic layer comprises the inventive compound (paragraph 0159), such as compound 1 (paragraph 0145), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image5.png
378
484
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of proviso (1)(ii) of instant Formula I when moiety A is a monocyclic 6-membered heterocyclic ring (pyridine), moiety B is a monocyclic ring structure comprising a 6-membered carbocyclic ring (benzene), Z1 is nitrogen and Z2 is carbon, K1 and K2 are both a direct bond, and moiety B also comprises, and is fused to a structure of Formula II via two joined RE groups. In formula II, X1-X7 are carbon atoms, T’ is a nitrogen atom, RA, RC and RD are each hydrogen atoms and two RE are joined to form the benzene ring of moiety B which is coordinated to metal, M, and M is iridium.
Kwon teaches that when the organometallic compound represented by Formula I is included in an organic light-emitting device, the device exhibits excellent luminescence efficiency, lifespan, and color purity.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the compound in the organic layer of a device with the claimed device structure in order to obtain a device which exhibits excellent luminescence efficiency, lifespan, and color purity, as taught by Kwon..
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the device of Kwon in a consumer product, as taught by Kwon.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2022/0069237 A1) above, and further in view of Metz et al. (US 2016/0072081 A1).
With respect to claims 18 and 19, Kwon teaches the device of claim 17, as discussed above.
However, Kwon does not teach any of the instant host materials.
In analogous art, Metz teaches a matrix material for use in an electroluminescent device. A preferred embodiment of this matrix material is given on page 17 which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image10.png
119
225
media_image10.png
Greyscale
In this formula, T is a sulfur atom (paragraph 0084).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to use the matrix material of Metz as a host in the device of Kwon as Metz teaches that these compounds are suitable matrix materials for use as a host for an emitter compound (paragraph 0090).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choung et al. (US 2022/0194973 A1) – teaches relevant compounds
Park et al. (US 2022/0209140 A1) – teaches relevant compounds
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 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, Jennifer 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.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Examiner, Art Unit 1786