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. Drawings The drawing is objected to because FILLIN "Enter appropriate reason" \* MERGEFORMAT only one drawing is shown; thus, it must not be numbered and the abbreviation "FIG." must not appear. See CFR 1.87(u) . 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. Abstract The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because FILLIN "Enter appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT the abstract contains 152 words which is more than the 150-word maximum . A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: FILLIN "Enter appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT only one drawing is shown; thus, it must not be numbered and the abbreviation "FIG." must not appear. See CFR 1.87(u). All mentions to FIG. 1 in the specification should be replaced with the words "the FIGURE." Appropriate correction is required. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: FILLIN "Enter appropriate information" \* MERGEFORMAT preferred embodiment of general formula (3), including compound AC-11, do not match the precedin g description. Compound AC-11 is a compound of general formula (3), however, both A1 and A2 cannot be 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoropyridin-4-yl at the same time. A screenshot of both compound AC-11 as well as the conflicting description are provided below . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claim FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: FILLIN "Enter appropriate explanation" \* MERGEFORMAT a screenshot of general formula (1) and general formula (2) are provided below . General formula (1) and general formula (2) both display the symbol “…” that is unnecessary and may imply that the structure preceding the symbol is a repeating unit in a polymeric material o r structure. Appropriate correction is required. 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 FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 2 ]" Zeika et al. (EP2180029A1, hereinafter " Zeika ") . Regarding claim 1, Zeika teaches , in the art of organic light-emitting devices, radialene compounds for use as an organic doping agent in an organic semiconductive matrix ( pg 2, ¶ [0001]). Zeika further teaches preferred exemplary embodiments of the invention including Example 1 where a layer including a arylamine derivative such as “Spiro-TTB” and an acceptor compound such as “ (2E,2’E,2"E)-2,2’,2"-(cyclopropane-1,2,3-triylidene)tris (2-( perfluorophenyl )-acetonitrile) ” with a doping concentration of 5 mol% and a thickness of 50 nm ( pg 6-9, ¶ [0027] – [0061]). The structure and molecular weight of both compounds, referred hereinafter as Spiro-TTB and Compound 1 respectively , are shown below. Considering the molecular weight of Compound 1 is 651.29 g/mol with a mol% of 5% and the molecular weight of Spiro-TTB is 1097.43 g/mol, the resulting conversion leads to a wt % of 3% for Compound 1 in the layer, which is within the range of 0.1 to 20 wt % of instant claim 1 . Zeika further teaches that Spiro-TTB may be doped as the hole-injecting material in the hole injecting layer for an organic light emitting device ( pg 2, ¶ [0011]). Zeika teaches the organic light emitting device may have a structure of anode, hole-injecting layer (HIL) , electron blocking layer, light emitting layer, electron transport layer, followed by a cathode. In addition, Zeika teaches that selected materials may provide the same high conductivities in a hole injecting layer type host and a hole transport type host (HTL) citing a need to achieve good doping results in host materials conventionally used as the HTL. Zeika further teaches that compounds such as TDATA, shown below, may be used in the hole transport layer (HTL) , which is a compound of instant General Formula (1) where two adjacent R2 connect with each other to form an unsaturated ring ( pg 4 , [0 020 ]) . 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 have substituted TDATA with Spiro-TTB in the device of Zeika , based on the teaching of Zieka . The motivation for doing so would have been to achieve a high conductivity material in the hole transport layer , as taught by Hayashi. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have tried TDATA as the hole transporting layer in place of Spiro-TTB, which would have been a choice from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions of a compound useful as the dopant in the HTL layer of the organic light-emitting device of Zieka and possessing the benefits taught by Zieka . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to produce additional compounds represented by devices comprising high conductivity materials having the benefits taught by Zieka in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.I.(E). Zeika teaches that a layer can include electron donor-like base material including a compound such as TPD, shown below, which is a compound of instant General Formula (2) where R6 is an aryl group. ( pg 4-5, ¶ [0020] – [0026]). Regarding instant claim 2, Zeika teaches that the radialene compounds used in the examples, including Example 1 above, give good doping properties including a reduction potential in the range of 0V vs Fc/Fc+ to 0.4V vs Fc/Fc+. Therefore, the potential range of the acceptor compounds of Zeika appears substantially identical to the claimed range in instant claim 2 . Zieka teaches that the reduction potentials measured above are affected by the substitution pattern defined by those radialene compounds, wherein favorable substitution patterns involve acceptor units such as cyano , fluoro , chloro , bromo, and the like ( pg 3, ¶ [0010]). Zieka further teaches that high electron affinities, and thus reduction potentials, are suitable for the application of an organic light emitting device; in addition, radialene compounds as doping agents have an advantageous electron affinity that make sufficient electrical conductivity of the organic semiconductive matrix ( pg 2, ¶ [0004] – [0007]). Therefore, Zieka discloses the claimed invention except for that reduction potential between the range of 0.4 to 0.5V by CV . It should be noted that reduction potentials are result effective variables. Zieka teaches that high electron affinities, and thus reduction potentials, are suitable for organic light-emitting devices . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to create radialene acceptor compounds as taught by Zieka since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In the present invention, one would have been motivated to optimize the substitution of the radialene acceptor compounds to achieve the optimal reduction potentials . Claim FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 2 ]" Zeika et al. (EP2180029A1, hereinafter " Zeika ") and in further view of Hayashi et al. (US2018/0294416A1, hereinafter "Hayashi") . Regarding instant claim 1, Zeika teaches all of the limitations of instant claim 1 as applied above. However, Zeika is silent about the specific structure of the organic light-emitting device, including the location of the triarylamine compound “TPD” and the layering with the OLED stack . Hayashi teaches, in the relevant art of organic electroluminescent devices, an organic EL device having at least an anode, a first hole transport layer, a second hole transport layer, a luminous layer, an electron transport layer, and a cathode in this order, wherein the second hole transport layer contains an arylamine compound represented by General Formula (1) of Hayashi. A diagram of the organic EL device of Hayashi as well as the General Formula (1) of Hayashi is shown below ( Abstract, Fig. 1, ¶ [0023] – [0028] ) . Hayashi teaches General Formula (1), which is a triarylamine compound, is contained within the second hole transport layer which is between the luminous layer and the hole transport layer. Hayashi further teaches that an organic light emitting device with such a structure including compounds of General Formula (1) of Hayashi displays high luminous efficiency and power efficiency, is low in light emission starting voltage, is low in practical driving voltage, and has a long lifetime. 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 have substituted the Organic EL Device structure of Hayashi where the compound in the second hole transport layer is the General Formula (1) of Hayashi with a triarylamine compound TPD of Zeika , based on the teaching of Hayashi. The TPD compound of Zeika is a compound of the General Formula (1) of Hayashi wherein n1 is 0 and Ar1 to Ar4 is phenyl. The motivation for doing so would have been to achieve a device with a high luminous efficiency and power efficiency, with a low light emission starting voltage, with a low practical driving voltage, and has a long lifetime, as taught by Hayashi. Such a modified device of Zeika and Hayashi would read on instant claim 1 wherein a triarylamine compound of instant general formula (2) is included in an electron barrier layer between the hole transport layer and the light-emitting layer . Claim FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 2 ]" Zeika et al. (EP2180029A1, hereinafter " Zeika ") and in further view of Hummert et al. (EP3034489A1, hereinafter " Hummert ") . Zeika teaches that radialene compounds are capable to dope all common OLED hole transport materials since they are strong electron acceptors that easily form radical ion salts or charge-transfer complexes with electron donor compounds ( pg 3, ¶ [0008] – [0009]). Zeika further teaches that the radialene compounds may follow the general structure shown below where X is independently selected from cyanomethylidene group modified with R1, shown below (claim 1). Zieka further teaches that R1 of the Radialene Formula of Zieka may include, but is not limited to, moieties such as tetrafluoro-4( trifluoromethyljphenyl ) and 4-cyanoperfluorophenyl. However, Zieka does not teach preferred embodiments that read on the specific limitations of instant claim 3 where the radialene compound must include specific groups. Hummert teaches , in the relevant field of doped semiconducting materials , specific radialene such as compound B2, B4, and B6 shown below for use as dopants in a semiconducting material. Compounds B1, B4, and B6 is a compound of the Radialene Formula of Zieka . Hummert further teaches that the radialene compounds shown above have a low melting point and low evaporation temperature, while maintaining a high decomposition temperature of over 300℃ ( pg 8-9, ¶ [0025], Table 1), which are preferable parameters for compounds successfully used in vacuum thermal evaporation processes for manufacturing devices ( pg 2, ¶ [0001] - [0003]). 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 have substituted the radialene compounds of Hummert including B1, B4, and B6 for the radialene compound of Zieka , as taught by Hummert . The motivation for doing so would have been to achieve a more effective fabrication of an organic light emitting device via vacuum thermal evaporation with a radialene compound exhibiting low melting point and high thermal decomposition temperatures, as taught by Hummert . The modified organic light-emitting device of Zieka and Hummert containing compounds B1, B4, or B6 of Hummert reads on instant claim 3. For example, compound B1 of Hummert is a compound of instant general formula (3) where at least one of the heteroaryl A1 is 2,4,5-tris(trifluoromethyl)-1,3-diazin-5-yl and A2 is 4-cyano-2,3,5,6-tetrafluorophenyl. Compound B4 of Hummert is a compound of instant general formula (3) where A1 is 4-cyano-2,3,5,6-tetrafluorophenyl and at least one of the heteroaryl A2 is 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoropyridin-4-yl and A1 and A2 are not 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoropyridin-4-yl at the same time. Compound B6 of Hummert is a compound of instant general formula (3) where at least one aryl A2 is 2,4-bis(trifluoromethyl)-3,5,6-trifluorophenyl and A1 is 4-cyano-2,3,5,6-tetrafluorophenyl. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT LUCAS Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1199 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Thursday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Fridays 7:45 am to 12:00PM . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Jennifer Boyd can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /L.Q.N./ Examiner, Art Unit 1786 /JENNIFER A BOYD/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1786