Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/994,825

LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE INCLUDING AMINE-BASED COMPOUND, ELECTRONIC APPARATUS INCLUDING THE LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE, AND THE AMINE-BASED COMPOUND

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 28, 2022
Examiner
CLARK, GREGORY D
Art Unit
1786
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1016 granted / 1202 resolved
+19.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1246
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
50.0%
+10.0% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1202 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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. Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 2018/033966 A1). Regarding Claims 1-4, 10-20, Park teaches an electric element (OLED, paragraphs 19-23) the first electrode(anode), 130: the hole injection layer (paragraph 0021) 140: the hole transport layer, 141: a buffer layer (paragraph 0022) 150: the emitting layer, 151: the emitting auxiliary layer [0023] 160: the electron transport layer, 170: the electron injection layer (paragraph0024) 180: the second electrode (cathode). Park teaches that a compound can be used in the hole transport layer (paragraph 157). The compound (an amine-based compound ) can be represented by 1-1 (page 5): PNG media_image1.png 246 356 media_image1.png Greyscale shows X1 and X2 as CH; X3 and X4 as CZ3 and CZ4 as Z3 and Z4 are bonded together to form an naphthyl ring system; T2 = Formula 2 (L1 = single bone; Ar1 and Ar2 = phenyl); a1 = 0; a2 = 1; 1-1 lacks at least one of Z1 to Z4. Formula 1-1 is a derivative of generic Formula (1) (page 3): PNG media_image2.png 308 492 media_image2.png Greyscale 1-1 corresponds to generic Formula (1) all R(s) = H; Ar1 and Ar2 = phenyl; A = naphthyl. . PNG media_image3.png 282 511 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 1012 528 media_image4.png Greyscale The office notes that the R groups of generic Formula (1) are independently defined by a finite set of options which are viewed as functionally equivalent substituents which upon selection give rise to obvious variants of generic Formula (1), absent unexpected results. One such variant reading on applicants’ Formula 1 is best viewed as a modification of Park’s 1-1 wherein R1 is represented by -U-NRaRb (corresponding to applicants’ Formula 2), (above in paragraph 55); all remaining R(s) = H ;L’ as (U) is a single bond and Ra and Ra are aryl or heteroaryl groups; A = phenyl (corresponding to applicants’ A1) fused to A2 as phenyl (Formula 1A); applicants’ T2 is a diphenylamine group. [The office notes the U is not defined in the reference which is viewed as a typo as L’ whereas appears to be the correct symbol. For purposes of examination U will be treated as L’ (paragraph 55).] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to have made a variety of derivatives of Park’s generic Formula (1) by selecting various functional equivalent substituents which would have included the above variant which reads on the instant limitations, absent unexpected results (per claims 1, 10, 12). The hole transport layer is viewed as an interlayer between the anode and the emitting layer(above) (per claims 2-4). Park’s modified 1-1 shows A2 as phenyl (per claim 11) Park’s modified 1-1 shows fused rings at Z3 and Z4; therefore Z1 or Z2 which corresponds to Park’s R1 can be the carbon bonded to the amino group Formula 2 with the remaining group as H (per claims 13-14) Park’s modified 1-1 shows a1 = 0; a2 = 1 (per claim 15) Park’s modified 1-1 shows one of R1 or R2 as Formula 2; all remaining R(s) = H (per claim 16) Park’s modified 1-1 shows Formula 2 (L1 = single bond; Ar1 and Ar2 = phenyl), 2A-1 (per claims 17-19) Park’s modified 1-1 reads on applicants’ PNG media_image5.png 182 160 media_image5.png Greyscale wherein R1-R3 and R5 = H; T2 and T11 = Formula 2 (L1 = single bond; Ar1 and Ar2 = phenyl) (per claim 20). Regarding Claim 7, Park a display device including the organic electric element (OLED); and a control part driving the display apparatus (paragraph 84) (per claim 7). Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overpark (US 2018/033966 A1) in view of Seki (US 2013/0105785). Regarding Claims 8-9, Park teaches the OLED used in a transistor (paragraph 85) but fails to mention the remaining components. Seki teaches an image display apparatus including an organic light-emitting device and a thin-film transistor (TFT) device wherein the anode or a cathode of the organic light-emitting device is connected to a drain electrode or a source electrode of the TFT device. The thin-film transistor device serves as a device configured to apply an electrical current to the organic light-emitting device (paragraph 52). The organic light-emitting device also contains a color filter (paragraph 50). As both Park and Seki teaches organic light-emitting devices and Seki teaches an organic light-emitting device configured in an electronic apparatus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to have used the organic light-emitting device of Park in known application areas which would have included in an electronic apparatus as taught by Seki which reads on the instant limitations, absent unexpected results (per claims 8-9). Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overpark (US 2018/033966 A1) in view of Hwang (US 2016/0190450 A1). Regarding Claim 6, Park teaches the invention of claim 1, but fails to mention capping layers. Hwang teaches an OLED with the following layering: first capping layer, first electrode, organic layer, second electrode, and second capping layer, wherein layers of each structure are sequentially stacked in the stated order (paragraph 148). The first capping layer and the second capping layer may help improve external luminous efficiency based on the principle of constructive interference (paragraph 260). The office interprets the above to mean that before the filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the OLED of Park by adding a capping layer outside of the first and second electrodes since Hwang teach this configuration may improve luminous efficiency, absent unexpected results (per claim 6). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5 is 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 of record fails to show: a capping layer located outside the first electrode or located outside the second electrode, wherein the capping layer comprises the amine-based compound (per claim 5). 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604655
POLYMER, QUANTUM DOT COMPOSITION AND LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE EMPLOYING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584066
LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584067
COMPOUND, MATERIAL FOR ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT ELEMENT, ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT ELEMENT, AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581793
ORGANIC LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR, DISPLAY PANEL, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577202
ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT MATERIALS AND DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+8.2%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1202 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month