DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is responsive to the amendment received February 25, 2026. Claims 1, 4, 6, 13, 14, and 16 were amended. Claims 1-16 are pending.
The previous rejection of claims 14 and 16 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or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention is withdrawn due to the claim amendment of claims 14 and 16 in the amendment dated February 25, 2026.
The rejection of claims 1-4, 6-9, 11, and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ha et al. (US 2020/0343450 A1) is withdrawn due to the claim amendment received February 25, 2026.
The rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ha et al. (US 2020/0343450 A1) is withdrawn due to the claim amendment received February 25, 2026.
The rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ha et al. (US 2020/0343450 A1) in view of Ha et al. (US 2022/0376178 A1) is withdrawn due to the claim amendment received February 25, 2026.
The rejection of claims 13 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ha et al. (US 2020/0343450 A1) in view of Youn et al. (US 2018/0166644) is withdrawn due to the claim amendment received February 25, 2026.
The rejection of claims 15 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ha et al. (US 2020/0343450 A1) in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2017/0025621 A1) is withdrawn due to the claim amendment received February 25, 2026.
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 8 and 9 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.
Claim 8 recites a formula 2-4 with a variable “Ar”, but it is not seen where “Ar” (without a superscript number) is defined.
Claim 9 recites groups with X1 to X6 and Y1 to Y4, but the specific variables are not defined in either claim 9 or in parent claim 1.
Clarification and/or correction are required.
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 8 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. 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 8 recites formula 2-7 as a formula 2, but parent claim 1 does not recite Y includes carbon. Accordingly, claim 8 includes compounds outside the scope of claim 1 upon which claim 8 depends.
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110416422 A (listed on 11/08/2022; note that a machine translation is provided with this office communication and referred to in the below citations).
CN ‘422 teaches materials for forming a layered organic electroluminescent device. A first material may include at least the below HT1-100 or HT1-102 (translation copy page 10) per instant Formula 1 where instant X is oxygen:
PNG
media_image1.png
128
152
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
136
168
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
A host for the light emitting layer may include at least EMH-13 (see page 23-24 of translation and examples) per instant Formula 2 where instant Y is S or EMH-8 per instant Formula 2:
PNG
media_image3.png
122
186
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
102
196
media_image4.png
Greyscale
.
Device structures are described at page 32-36 of translation where HT1 materials are used in a hole transport layer and EMH material is used as host in a light emitting layer. It is not seen where a device was made where specific above compound HT1-100 or HT1-102 was selected in combination with above EMH-13 or EMH-8 in an example embodiment. Given the teachings of the reference, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to have formed a device with material HT1-100 or HT1-102 in a hole transport layer and EMH-13 or EMH-8 in a light emitting layer, because the reference teaches the materials as suitable for these functional layers in forming a light emitting device structure. One would expect to achieve a functional device within the disclosure of CN ‘422 with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, above HT1-100 meets the requirements of instant Formula 1-1.
Regarding claim 3, above HT1-100 meets the requirements of instant Formula 1-8.
Regarding claim 4, above HT1-102 meets the requirements of a compound with an instant B-1 group comprising V1 and V2 as including a single bond and NR10 respectively.
Regarding claim 5, the R1 to R4 instant groups are not required to be present as a to d may be zero. Additionally, it is noted that general formula (1) teaches Z of the core ring group maybe contain substituents R6 that connect to form a ring structure (see translation copy page 4).
Regarding claim 6, note that at least above HT1-100 is the same as instant compound 1-11.
Regarding claim 7, at least above compound EMH-8 meets the formula 2-1 requirement.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, at least above compound EMH-8 appears to meet formula 2-4 requirements and group of claim 9 (note that claims 8 and 9 are currently rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 above).
Regarding claim 10, note that at least above EMH-13 is the same as instant compound 2-21.
Regarding claim 11, the “HT1” compounds are used in a hole transport layer of a device (see translation page 2).
Regarding a layer of claim 12, the devices include a substrate layer (see translation page 2) and also includes a package structure (see page 25).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110416422 A in view of Youn et al. (US 2018/0166644).
CN ‘422 is relied upon as set forth above for the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, CN ‘422 teaches a device may be comprised of stacked structures (see translation page 25-26), but appears silent with respect to forming a specific stack per instant claim 13 and a charge generating layer between the stacks per claim 14. In analogous art, Youn et al. teaches tandem OLEDs (see figure 1 and layer descriptions in par. 31-38) have a high level of luminescence and longer lifespan due to higher reliability compared to single OLEDs (par. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed an organic light emitting display comprising multiple organic material layers separated by a charge generating layer between organic layer stacks as taught by Youn et al. and including layers as taught by CN ‘422, because one would expect to achieve a display having high luminescence and long lifespan with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110416422 A in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2017/0025621 A1).
CN ‘422 is relied upon as set forth above for the rejection of claim 1.
CN ‘422 teaches a light emitting device, but appears silent with respect to describing specifically the inclusion of a control unit for driving the display device. In analogous art, Suzuki et al. teaches a light emitting element (see abstract) that teaches including a control unit for a light device (see Suzuki et al. claims 15 and 16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed an organic light emitting display as taught by CN ‘422 and to have further included a control unit for driving a display as taught by Suzuki et al., because one would expect to achieve an operational display with a predictable result and a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dawn Garrett whose telephone number is (571)272-1523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday (Eastern Time).
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.
/DAWN L GARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786