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
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to. The limitation “each of a A1 ring, a A2 ring, and a A3 ring” should be amended to “each or ring A1, ring A2, and ring A3” for better clarity.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 8, 9, 11, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meng et al. (CN-110790782, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 3/26/25).
Claims 1-3: Meng et al. teaches compounds 8, 9, 126, 127, and 130. These compounds anticipate Formula 1 of claim 1. For example, compound 9, which has the structure
PNG
media_image1.png
78
150
media_image1.png
Greyscale
anticipates Formula 1 with rings A1, A2, and A3 all equal to unsubstituted benzene rings, X equal to B, Y1 equal to N, Y2 equal to NR5, R5 equal to a C6-substituted C14 aryl group (specifically, a 9-phenyl-substituted anthracen-10-yl group), a1 and a2 equal to zero, a3 equal to 1, and R3 equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group. This compound also anticipates Formula 2-2 of claim 2, and Formula 2-4 of claim 3, with all variable assignments being the same as in claim 1.
Claims 8 and 9: Compound 9 above also anticipates Formula 3-5 of claim 8 and Formula 3-6 of claim 9 with R21-R28 equal to hydrogen atoms, and for claim 9, R31-R33 equal to hydrogen atoms, and all other variables being described in claim 1 above.
Claims 11 and 19: The compounds taught by Meng et al., which includes compounds 8, 9, 126, 127, and 130, are employed as blue dopants in organic electroluminescent devices. The exemplified device is comprised of an anode (a first electrode), a hole transport region, an emission layer comprising a host and one of the boron-based dopants taught therein, an electron transport region, and a cathode (a second electrode). The preparation of a device prepared according to Meng et al. with any one of the explicitly taught boron compounds as a blue dopant, including compounds 8, 9, 126, 127, and 130, is at once envisaged. A device comprising said compounds as a dopant satisfies all of the limitations of claim 11 in that the organic light-emitting device comprises one blue pixel, which anticipates claim 19.
Claims 1-3, 8, 9, 11, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN-114315877, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 3/26/25). A machine translation of this document is included with this Office action.
Claims 1-3, 8, and 9: Compounds V263-V274 of Li et al. anticipate Formula 1 of claim 1. As one example, the compound V264, which has the structure,
PNG
media_image2.png
108
102
media_image2.png
Greyscale
has variable X equal to B, rings A1, A2, and A3 equal to substituted benzene, variable Y1 equal to N, variables a1, a2, and a3 equal to zero, Y2 equal to NR5, and R5 equal to a 9,9-dimethylfluoren-3-yl group. Compound V264 above also anticipates Formula 2-2 of claim 2 and Formula 2-4 of claim 3 with R3 equal to a hydrogen atom, and all other variable assignments in Formulae 2-2 and 2-4 being described in claim 1.
Claims 8 and 9: Compound V264 also anticipates Formula 3-5 of claim 8 with R22 and R26 equal to t-butyl, and for claim 9, R32 equal to methyl, all other R groups being equal to hydrogen atoms, and all other variable assignments being described in claim 1 above.
Claims 11 and 19: The compounds taught by Li et al. as described in claim 1 above are employed as thermally activated delayed fluorescent (TADF) dopant in organic electroluminescent devices. The devices are comprised of an anode (a first electrode), a hole transport region, an emission layer comprising a host and one of the taught TADF dopants, an electron transport region, and a cathode (a second electrode). The preparation of a device prepared according to the device examples with any one of the explicitly taught dopants of Li et al., including any one of compounds V263-V274 is at once envisaged. A device comprising one of these compounds as taught according to Li et al. satisfies all of the limitations of claim 11 where the device comprises one blue pixel, thereby anticipating claims 11 and 19.
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.
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 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN-114315877) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above.
While Li et al. does not explicitly teach a light-emitting device which includes a blue host which satisfies Formula 5 of claim 12 or one of the compounds recited in claim 13, the overall teachings of Li et al. render obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art the preparation of devices which do satisfy claims 12 and 13. Specifically, Li et al. teaches that the host material in the devices prepared therein includes one of the compounds BFH-1 through BFH-17 (page 12 of the machine translation and whose structures are shown in paragraph 0146 of Li et al.). The selection of any one of the explicitly taught host compounds BFH-1 through BFH-17 would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art. Additionally, BFH-3 and BFH-4 correspond to compounds H-2 and H-1, respectively, of claim 13. Devices comprising one of these two host materials in conjunction with a boron-based compound described in claim 1 above satisfies all of the device limitations of claims 12 and 13.
Claims 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN-114315877) in view of Sim et al. (KR-20210148504) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above. Copies of the original and a machine translation of Sim et al. are included with this Office action.
While Li et al. does not explicitly teach that the organic light-emitting devices taught therein include a second emitting layer including a third compound as required by claim 14, or a third emitting layer as required by claim 16 with a charge generation layer between the first, second, and third emitting layer, or a color filter layer disposed on the red, green, and blue pixels as required by claim 18, or a second emitting material layer emitting yellow-green, red, and green light as required by claim 16, or a color filter layer disposed on the red, green, and blue pixels as required by claim 17, or that the organic light-emitting device further includes a color conversion layer disposed on the organic light-emitting diodes for the red and green pixels as required by claim 15, it is submitted that all of these device architectures would have been obvious given the teachings of Sim et al. Li et al. and Sim et al. are combinable as they are from the same field of organic light-emitting devices. Li et al. teaches on pages 11 and 12 of the machine translation that the light-emitting layer may be a single color light-emitting layer emitting or it may emit a plurality of different colors arranged in a pixel pattern. Li et al. also teaches that the light-emitting layers may be stacked together to form a color light-emitting layer. The light emitting layers may be separated from each other, and that they are individually capable of emitting red, green, and blue. One having ordinary skill in the art understands that to prepare lighting elements from the organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) taught by Li et al. where said OLEDs are comprised of a red light-emitting layer, a green light-emitting layer, and a blue light-emitting layer, a pixel display comprising red, blue, and green pixels would need to be prepared. Alternatively, the teachings of Li et al. leads one having ordinary skill in the art to prepare a display which is configured to emit light using a tandem organic light-emitting device comprising red, green, and blue light emitting layers which are stacked in tandem with each color light-emitting layer being separated by charge generation layer. Such device embodiments are known in the art. Sim et al. represents one such teaching. Figures 5 and 6 of the instant application et al. teach all of the subject matter of claims 14-18. Sim et al. teaches in Fig. 3 a device which is substantially similar to Fig. 5 of Applicants specification. Additionally, Sim et al. teaches that the light emitting element in Fig. 3 may be comprised of a first emission unit, a first charge generation layer, a second emission unit, a second charge generation layer, and a third emission unit. It would have therefore been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to prepare a combine the organic light-emitting devices taught by Li et al. with the device limitations taught by Sim et al. which include the device limitations of claims 14-18 to arrive at the claimed invention. One having ordinary skill in the art would have had a clear motivation to combine these elements because color filters and color conversion layers are known, conventional elements in the art of display and lighting technology, used to achieve the predictable result of isolating or modifying the color output of a light source.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 10, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art does not teach or suggest compounds which satisfy formula 3-1 of claim 4, or the specific compounds recited in each of claims 10 and 20. Claims 5-7 are allowable by virtue of their dependency on claim 4.
Relevant Art Cited
Additional prior art documents which are relevant to Applicants invention can be found on the attached PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S LOEWE whose telephone number is (571)270-3298. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1302. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Robert S Loewe/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766