DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Claims 14-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 17, 2026.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on applications filed in Japan on July 6, 2020 and March 1, 2021.
4. Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C.
119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the
foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and
41.202(e).
5. Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded
for the non-English application.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. The references provided in the Information Disclosure Statements filed on March
10, 2023 and September 26, 2025 have been considered. Signed copies of the corresponding 1449 forms have been included with this office action.
Drawings
7. The drawings are objected to because under CFR 1.84(u), “Where only a single view is used in an application to illustrate the claimed invention, it must not be numbered and the abbreviation “FIG.” must not appear.8. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
9. The disclosure is objected to because in accordance with the drawing objection presented above, all mentions to FIG. 1 should be deleted and instead replaced with the words “the FIGURE.”10. Appropriate correction is required.
11. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Table 1 includes a list of four compounds (H1, T13, E1, and Z1) which are all labeled “First Organic Compound” instead of “First, Second, Third, and Fourth Organic Compound” wherein H1, T13, E1, and Z1 are the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Organic Compound, respectively.
12. Additionally, the list of example compounds for the third organic compound (¶ [0053]) are all labeled F1-F11, while in Table 1 and the discussions regarding Examples 1 and 2 (¶ [0111]-[0112]), the specific third organic compound in those examples is referred to as E1.
13. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
14. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “maximum component of light emission from the organic light emitting device is light emission from the third organic compound:” should be replaced with “a maximum component of light emission from the organic light emitting device is light emission from the third organic compound[[:]],”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
15. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
16. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35
U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written
description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described
in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant
art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed
invention.
17. Per MPEP 2163(II)(A)(3)(a)(ii), the written description requirement for a claimed
genus may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of
species by (A) actual reduction to practice, (B) reduction to drawings, or (C) by
disclosure of relevant, identifying characteristics, i.e., structure or other physical and/or
chemical properties, by functional characteristics coupled with a known or disclosed
correlation between function and structure, or by a combination of such identifying
characteristics, sufficient to show the applicant was in possession of the claimed genus.
A "representative number of species" means that the species which are adequately
described are representative of the entire genus. Thus, when there is substantial
variation within the genus, one must describe a sufficient variety of species to reflect the
variation within the genus.
18. Independent claim 1 requires an organic light emitting device having a light emitting layer that contains a first organic compound, a second organic compound, a third organic compound, and a fourth organic compound satisfying the following
requirements (a) and (b), wherein:
the second organic compound is a delayed fluorescent material; and
maximum component of light emission from the organic light emitting device is light emission from the third organic compound; and
requirement (a): ES1(1) > ES1(4) > ES1(2) > ES1(3); and
requirement (b): ET1(1) > ET1(2) > ET1(3) > ET1(4); and
ES1(X) (where X = 1-4) represents a lowest excited singlet energy of the first through fourth organic compounds, respectively; and
ET1(X) (where X = 1-4) represents a lowest excited triplet energy of the first through fourth organic compounds, respectively.
19. Claim 1 does not further define the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds by a specific structure or general formula. Thus, as the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds are so broadly defined, the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds may contain any number of compounds, and the compounds may
be small molecules, oligomers, or polymers, and may be purely organic, organometallic,
or metallic compounds.
20. The instant description includes a description of what materials may be suitable
as the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds in the organic light emitting device, see:
¶ [0022]-[0023] for a description of the first organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0024]-[0051] for a description of the second organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0052]-[0055] for a description of the third organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0056]-[0070] for a description of the fourth organic compound and representative examples.
21. The description only provides a single example of an organic light emitting device having a light emitting layer that contains a first organic compound, a second organic compound, a third organic compound, and a fourth organic compound that meets the requirements as per claim 1 (Example 1 ¶ [0110]-[0111]; see also Table 1). The specification further provides exceptionally broad guidance on what materials might be useable as the first organic compound, the second organic compound, the third organic compound, and the fourth organic compound of the organic light emitting device but provides no further description of which structural features are required beyond the relationships between the lowest excited singlet and triplet energies. The limited number of examples described in the written description does not provide a representative number of species sufficient to show that Applicant was in possession of the claimed genus (see MPEP 2163-II-A-1-ii).
22. Dependent claims 2-13 are also rejected as they do not remedy the
aforementioned issue as discussed regarding claim 1.
23. Claims 8 and 9 require the organic light emitting device wherein the second organic compound (as per claim 8) and the third organic compound (as per claim 9) have an energy difference ΔEST between a lowest excited single state and a lowest excited triplet state at 77 K that is 0.3 eV or less.
24. Claims 8 and 9 do not further define the second and third organic compounds by a specific structure or general formula. Thus, as the second and third organic compounds are so broadly defined, the second and third organic compounds may contain any number of compounds, and the compounds may be small molecules, oligomers, or polymers, and may be purely organic, organometallic, or metallic compounds.
25. The instant description includes a description of what materials may be suitable
as the second and third organic compounds in the organic light emitting device, see:
¶ [0024]-[0051] for a description of the second organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0052]-[0055] for a description of the third organic compound and representative examples.
26. The description only provides a single example of an organic light emitting device having a light emitting layer that contains a second organic compound and a third organic compound that meet the requirements as per claims 8 and 9 (Example 1 ¶ [0110]-[0111]; see also Table 1). The specification further provides exceptionally broad guidance on what materials might be useable as the second organic compound and the third organic compound of the organic light emitting device but provides no further description of which structural features are required beyond an energy difference ΔEST between a lowest excited single state and a lowest excited triplet state at 77 K that is 0.3 eV or less. The limited number of examples described in the written description does not provide a representative number of species sufficient to show that Applicant was in possession of the claimed genus (see MPEP 2163-II-A-1-ii).
27. Claims 10-13 require the organic light emitting device wherein:
the light emitting layer is composed of a compound alone formed of atoms selected from the group consisting of a carbon atom, a hydrogen atom, a nitrogen atom, a boron atom, an oxygen atom and a sulfur atom (as per claim 10); and
the first organic compound, the second organic compound and the fourth organic compound each are independently a compound formed of atoms selected from the group consisting of a carbon atom, a hydrogen atom and a nitrogen atom (as per claim 11); and
the fourth organic compound is a compound composed of only a carbon atom and a hydrogen atom (as per claim 12); and
the second organic compound contains a cyanobenzene structure (as per claim 13).
28. Claims 10-13 do not further define the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds by a specific structure or general formula. Thus, as the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds are so broadly defined, the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds may contain any number of compounds, and the compounds may be small molecules, oligomers, or polymers, and may be purely organic, organometallic, or metallic compounds.
29. The instant description includes a description of what materials may be suitable
as the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds in the organic light emitting device, see:
¶ [0022]-[0023] for a description of the first organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0024]-[0051] for a description of the second organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0052]-[0055] for a description of the third organic compound and representative examples; and
¶ [0056]-[0070] for a description of the fourth organic compound and representative examples.
30. The description only provides a single example of an organic light emitting device having a light emitting layer that contains a first organic compound, a second organic compound, a third organic compound, and a fourth organic compound that meets the requirements as per claims 10-13 (Example 1 ¶ [0110]-[0111]; see also Table 1). The specification further provides exceptionally broad guidance on what materials might be useable as the first organic compound, the second organic compound, the third organic compound, and the fourth organic compound of the organic light emitting device but provides no further description of which structural features are required beyond the relationships between the lowest excited singlet and triplet energies. The limited number of examples described in the written description does not provide a representative number of species sufficient to show that Applicant was in possession of the claimed genus (see MPEP 2163-II-A-1-ii).
31. 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.
32. Claims 10 and 12 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.
33. Regarding claim 10, the recitation of “…the light emitting layer is composed of a
compound alone formed of atoms selected from the group…” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if the claim is requiring the light emitting layer to include a compound that is only formed of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, boron, oxygen, and/or sulfur, or if the claim is requiring the light emitting layer to include only one compound wherein the compound is only formed of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, boron, oxygen, and/or sulfur. Additionally, if the claim is requiring the light emitting layer to include only one compound wherein the compound is only formed of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, boron, oxygen, and/or sulfur, this renders the claim indefiniite given that claim 1 requires at least four compounds in the light emitting layer (a first, a second, a third, and a fourth organic compound) and claim 10 depends upon claim 1. For the purposes of examination, the “compound alone” will be interpreted as applying to any one of the first, the second, the third, or the fourth organic compound, and the compound alone is formed only from atoms selected from the group of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, boron, oxygen, and sulfur .
34. Regarding claim 12, the recitation of “…wherein the fourth organic compound is a compound composed of only a carbon atom and a hydrogen atom” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear how a compound can be composed of only a carbon atom and a hydrogen atom. For the purposes of examination, “…composed of only a carbon atom and a hydrogen atom…” will be interpreted as “…composed of only carbon atoms and hydrogen atoms…”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
35. 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.
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2020/0185632 A1; hereinafter “Kim”) in view of Duan et al. (US 2019/0386235 A1; hereinafter “Duan”), as evidenced by Chen et al. (Chen, C.H.; Tierce, N. T.; Leung, M.; Chiu, T. L.; Lin, C. F.; Bardeen, C. J.; Lee, J. H. "Efficient Triplet–Triplet Annihilation Upconversion in an Electroluminescence Device with a Fluorescent Sensitizer and a Triplet-Diffusion Singlet-Blocking Layer" Adv. Mater. 2018, Vol. 30; hereinafter “Chen”).
39. Regarding claims 1-12, Kim teaches an organic light emitting device having a light emitting layer comprising a host material and two different delayed fluorescent materials whose energy levels are controlled, and wherein exciton energy is transferred from a first delayed fluorescent dopant to a second delayed fluorescent dopant, which has singlet and triplet energy levels lower than singlet and triplet energy levels of the first delayed fluorescent dopant ([Abstract]). Accordingly, Kim teaches the claimed limitations Es1(2)>Es1(3) and ET1(2)>ET1(3).
40. Kim teaches that exciton energy transfer from the first delayed fluorescent dopant to the second delayed fluorescent dopant, which has a narrower FWHM compared to the first delayed fluorescent dopant, improves the light emitting efficiency of the organic light emitting device ([Abstract]).
41. Kim teaches that the host compound is not limited to any specific materials, and that the only requirements are the excited state triplet energy level of the host T1H is higher than the excited state triplet energy levels of the first delayed fluorescent dopant T1TD1 and the second delayed fluorescent dopant T1TD2 and its HOMO and LUMO energy levels HOMOH and LUMOH satisfy the relationships in Equations (1), (2), (5) and (6) {see ¶ [0011] for Equations (1) and (5); ¶ [0080] for Equations (2); ¶ [0089] for Equations (6)} compared to the HOMO and LUMO energy levels HOMOTD1, HOMOTD2, LUMOTD1 and LUMOTD2 of the first and second delayed fluorescent dopants (¶ [0113]). Accordingly, Kim teaches ET1(1)>ET1(2) and ET1(1)>ET1(3). Given that Kim teaches ET1(2)>ET1(3), Kim thus teaches the claimed limitation ET1(1)> ET1(2)>ET1(3).
42. Kim also teaches that the light emitting layer may include a host with a plurality of dopants (¶ [0058]).
43. Kim teaches that the first delayed fluorescent dopant is not limited to any specific materials and that its molecular structure may comprise an electron acceptor moiety and an electron donor moiety that are connected via a proper linker so as to realize a
delayed fluorescence (¶ [0093]).
44. Kim teaches that the second delayed fluorescent dopant is not limited to any specific materials and that its molecular structure may comprise a plurality of fused hetero aromatic moieties and a narrow FWHM (¶ [0105]).
45. Kim discloses a specific organic light emitting device (¶ [0231]-[0233], and Table 2, Example 1) having a light emitting layer comprising:
a first organic compound mCBP (the host material); and
a second organic compound A-1 (which is a delayed fluorescent material, see structure below); and
a third organic compound B-1 (which contributes the maximum component of light emission as demonstrated by the narrower FWHM; see Table 2, Example 1 and cf. Ref. 1 wherein B-1 is absent from the light emitting layer; see structure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
350
333
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
254
356
media_image2.png
Greyscale
46. As demonstrated by data provided in Table 1 of Kim, the lowest excited state singlet and triplet energy values for mCBP, A-1, and B-1 (the first, second, and third organic compounds, respectively) satisfy requirements (a) and (b) shown below wherein:
requirement (a): ES1(1) > ES1(2) > ES1(3); and
requirement (b): ET1(1) > ET1(2) > ET1(3).
47. Kim does not teach the presence of a fourth organic compound, but Kimd does teach that organic light emitting the device utilizes a reverse intersystem crossing (RISC) mechanism to convert exciton energy at the excited state triplet energy level to exciton energy at the excited state singlet energy level (¶ [0075] and [0138]).
48. Duan teaches a TADF organic light emitting device utilizing RISC has a problem of low frequency of the fluorescent electroluminescent device (¶ [0006]). To solve this problem and obtain a device with improved efficiency, Duan teaches an organic light emitting device (¶ [0008]) wherein the light emitting layer contains (¶ [0009]):
a sensitizing material, which is also a thermally activated delayed fluorescent material; and
a first host material; and
a fluorescent dye.
49. Duan teaches that sensitization of the fluorescent dye by the thermally activated
delayed fluorescence compound in the light emitting layer of an organic light emitting device results in improved luminous efficiency and lowered driving voltage through TADF-Sensitized Fluorescence (TSF, ¶ [0023]).
50. Duan teaches suitable fluorescent dyes and specifically discloses the following compound (ADN, ¶ [0021]) that is preferably used as a fluorescent dye in the light emitting layer of the organic light emitting device.
PNG
media_image3.png
276
213
media_image3.png
Greyscale
51. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fluorescent dye ADN of Duan into the light emitting layer of Kim, based on the teaching of Duan. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve luminous efficiency and lower driving voltage through TADF-Sensitized Fluorescence (TSF, ¶ [0023]), as taught by Duan.
52. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select ADN as the fluorescent dye and incorporate it into the light emitting layer of the organic light emitting device of Kim, because it would have been choosing a fourth organic compound, which would have been a choice from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions of a compound useful as the fourth compound in the light emitting layer of the organic light emitting device of Kim and possessing the benefits taught by Duan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to produce additional devices comprising ADN as a fluorescent dye in the light emitting layer having the benefits taught by Duan {improved luminous efficiency and lowered driving voltage through TADF-Sensitized Fluorescence (TSF), ¶ [0023]} in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.I.(E).
53. Duan is silent with respect to the lowest excited singlet and triplet energy values of AND.
54. However, as evidenced by Chen in Figure 1(b), (pg. 2, see below) the lowest excited singlet energy (S1) of ADN is 3.0 eV and ) the lowest excited triplet energy (T1) of ADN is 1.7 eV.
55. Per claim 1, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, has a light emitting layer that contains:
a first organic compound mCBP; and
a second organic compound A-1; and
a third organic compound B-1; and
a fourth organic compound ADN.
56. As demonstrated by data provided in Table 1 of Kim and Figure 1(b) of Chen, the lowest excited state singlet and triplet energy values for mCBP, A-1, B-1, and ADN (the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds, respectively) satisfy requirements (a) and (b) shown below wherein:
requirement (a): ES1(1) > ES1(4) > ES1(2) > ES1(3); and
requirement (b): ET1(1) > ET1(2) > ET1(3) > ET1(4).
57. Regarding claims 2-7, Kim, as modified by Duan, discloses a specific organic light emitting device (¶ [0231]-[0233], and Table 2, Example 1) having a light emitting layer comprising:
a first organic compound mCBP with a concentration Conc(1) at 79 wt% of the light emitting layer; and
a second organic compound A-1 with a concentration Conc(2) at 20 wt% of the light emitting layer; and
a third organic compound B-1 with a concentration Conc(3) at 1 wt% of the light emitting layer.
58. Per claim 4, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, reads on requirement (d) wherein:
Conc(2)/Conc(3) > 5.
59. Per claim 7, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, reads on requirement (g) wherein:
Conc(3) ≤ 1 wt%.
60. Kim teaches that the light emitting layer may be approximately 50-75 wt% of the first compound (the host material), approximately 20-40 wt% of the second compound (the first delayed fluorescent dopant), and approximately 1-5 wt% of the third compound (the second delayed fluorescent dopant) (¶ [0114]), and Duan teaches that the fluorescent dye in the light emitting layer may be approximately 0.1-20 wt% (¶ [0047]).
61. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the concentration of the first, second, third, and fourth organic compounds in the light emitting layer of the organic light emitting device of Kim to within the claimed range because Duan establishes that it is a predictably suitable and preferred concentration for fluorescent dye in the light emitting layers of an organic light emitting device.
62. Per claims 2-3 and 5-6, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05.
63. Regarding claims 8 and 9, Kim teaches that the energy level bandgap ΔESTTD (the energy difference ΔEST) between a lowest excited single state S1TD and a lowest excited triplet state T1TD of the first and second delayed fluorescent dopants (the second compound per claim 8 and the third compound per claim 9, respectively) must be less than or equal to 0.3 eV to facilitate efficient the delayed fluorescence phenomenon (¶ [0067]).
64. Regarding claim 10, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, reads on the limitation in that the first organic compound (mCBP, the host material, structure shown below as evidenced by Yoon et al.: US 2020/0308209 A1) is composed of atoms selected from carbon, nitrogen, and hydrogen.
PNG
media_image4.png
335
385
media_image4.png
Greyscale
65. Regarding claim 11, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, reads on the limitation in that the first organic compound (mCBP, the host material), the second organic compound (A-1, the first delayed fluorescent dopant; see below), and the fourth compound (ADN, the fluorescent dye) are composed of atoms selected from carbon, nitrogen, and hydrogen.
PNG
media_image1.png
350
333
media_image1.png
Greyscale
66. Regarding claim 12, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, reads on the limitation in that the fourth organic compound (ADN, the fluorescent dye) is composed of atoms selected from only carbon and hydrogen.
67. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2020/0185632 A1; hereinafter “Kim”) in view of Duan et al. (US 2019/0386235 A1; hereinafter “Duan”), as evidenced by Chen et al. (Chen, C.H.; Tierce, N. T.; Leung, M.; Chiu, T. L.; Lin, C. F.; Bardeen, C. J.; Lee, J. H. "Efficient Triplet–Triplet Annihilation Upconversion in an Electroluminescence Device with a Fluorescent Sensitizer and a Triplet-Diffusion Singlet-Blocking Layer" Adv. Mater. 2018, Vol. 30; hereinafter “Chen”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Haldi et al. (US 2018/0323395 A1; hereinafter “Haldi”).
68. Regarding claim 13, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan, fails to include a second organic compound that contains a cyanobenzene structure. However, Kim teaches the first delayed fluorescent dopant is not limited to any specific material (¶ [0093]).
69. Haldi teaches an organic light emitting device comprising a light-emitting layer B comprising a host material HB, a first thermally activated delayed fluorescence (TADF) material EB, and a second TADF material SB, wherein EB transfers energy to SB and SB emits thermally activated delayed fluorescence ([Abstract]).
70. Haldi teaches that organic light emitting devices comprising two TADF materials in the light emitting layer exhibit longer lifetimes and higher efficiencies compared to devices with only one TADF material (¶ [0006]).
71. Haldi discloses the following compound TADF2 (see structure below, ¶ [0285]) and its lowest excited singlet and triplet energy values, as well as its HOMO and LUMO energy values. Accordingly, Haldi teaches TADF2 may suitably be selected as a TADF material in an OLED comprising a light emitting layer further comprising a host material and an additional TADF material.
PNG
media_image5.png
231
306
media_image5.png
Greyscale
72. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention substitute the compound A-1 (the first delayed fluorescent dopant) with TADF2 of Haldi, and further select the second delayed fluorescent dopant such that Equations (1), (3), (5) and (7) of Kim are satisfied, and the energy relationships of Es1(TD1)>Es1(TD2) and ET1(TD1)>ET1(TD2) of Kim are satisfied, because Haldi teaches TADF2 is a TADF material suitable for use in an organic light emitting device comprising a light emitting layer further comprising a host material and two TADF materials. The substitution would have been one known element for another and one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would reasonably expect the predictable result that TADF2 would be useful as the first delayed fluorescent dopant in the light emitting layer of the device of Kim, as modified by Duan. See MPEP 2143.I.(B).
73. Per claim 13, the organic light emitting device of Kim, as modified by Duan and Haldi, reads on the limitation in that the second organic compound (TADF2) contains a cyanobenzene structure.
Conclusion
74. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brandon J. Cooper whose telephone number is (571)272-0005. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
75. 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.
76. 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.
77. 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.
/B.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1786
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights