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 .
Response to Amendment
In the response filed 05/28/2026, the claims, specification, and drawings were amended.
These amendments are hereby entered.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, specification, and drawings, the objections to claims 7, 13, 16, and 19, the specification, and the drawings are withdrawn by the Office.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1-21 as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) of claims 7 and 9 as being of improper dependent form, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 of claims 1-8, 10-11, and 20 as being anticipated by Yang et al. (WO 2018/095385 A1), and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 9, 12, and 21 as being unpatentable over Yang as applied above, claim 13 as being unpatentable over Yang as applied above and further in view of Cha et al. (KR 2019/0006930 A), claims 14 and 15 as being unpatentable over Yang as applied above and further in view of Hatwar et al. (US 2010/0288362 A1), and claims 17-19 as being unpatentable over Yang and Hatwar as applied above, and further in view of Cha et al. (US 2019/00067588 A1) are withdrawn by the Office.
Claims 1-21 were originally filed.
Claim 22 has been added.
Claim 8 is canceled.
Claims 1, 7, 9-10, 13, and 16-19 are instantly amended.
Claims 1-7 and 9-22 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
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.
Claim 16 is 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.
With respect to claim 16, the claim requires that the first light-emitting layer comprises one of the compounds of claim 1. This introduces uncertainty into the claim because parent claim 14 requires a compound of claim 1 as one or more of the first and second host materials. It is unclear whether applicant is trying to limit the compound of claim 1 to the first host material, whether applicant is claiming that the compound is no longer limited to being a host material as long as it is in the first light-emitting layer, or whether the compound is simultaneously a host compound of the first and/or second light-emitting layer and also serving an additional function in the first light-emitting layer.
In continuing examination, this limitation is being interpreted as, “--wherein the first host [[light-emitting layer]] comprises the compound [[at least one selected from the compounds of claim 1]]”.
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 16 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.
With respect to claim 16, the claim requires that the first light-emitting layer comprises one of the compounds of claim 1. In one interpretation of this claim, Applicant is claiming that the compound is no longer limited to being a host material, as set forth in parent claim 14, but rather may serve any function as long as the compound is in the first light-emitting layer. In this interpretation, the claim does not further limit the subject matter 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2014/0306197 A1).
With respect to claims 1, 2, and 4-7, Kim discloses a compound of instant [Chemical Formula A] (Formula 2, paragraph 0030), such as compound 96 (page 20), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
290
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula A when A1, A2, and E are all an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), F is not present, two adjacent carbon atoms of A2 and two adjacent carbon atoms of A1 are fused to the 5-membered ring comprising substituents R1 and R2, y is 1, s1 is 1, L1 is a single bond, and Ar1 is represented by Structural Formula C, M is a sulfur atom, R1 and R2 are a C1 alkyl (methyl), R3 through R8 are not present, R11 and R12 are hydrogen atoms, R13 through R15 are not present, x and z are 0, and s2, L2, Ar2, s3, L3, and Ar3 are not present.
In Structural Formula C, R21 is a single bond linking to L1, R26 is an unsubstituted aryl of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), and all remaining R characters are hydrogen atoms.
With respect to claim 3, Kim teaches the compound of claim 2, and the aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms is represented by instant Structural Formula 10 (benzene), as discussed above.
With respect to claim 22, Kim discloses a compound of instant [Chemical Formula A] (Formula 2, paragraph 0030), such as compound 96 (page 20), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
290
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula A when A1, A2, and E are all an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), F is not present, two adjacent carbon atoms of A2 and two adjacent carbon atoms of A1 are fused to the 5-membered ring comprising substituents R1 and R2, y is 1, s1 is 1, L1 is a single bond, and Ar1 is represented by Structural Formula C, M is a sulfur atom, R1 and R2 are a C1 alkyl (methyl), R3 through R8 are not present, R11 and R12 are hydrogen atoms, R13 through R15 are not present, x and z are 0, and s2, L2, Ar2, s3, L3, and Ar3 are not present.
In Structural Formula C, R21 is a single bond linking to L1, R26 is an unsubstituted aryl of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), and all remaining R characters are hydrogen atoms.
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.
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.
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 9-12, 14-17, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2014/0306197 A1) as applied above.
With respect to claim 9, Kim teaches the compound of claim 1, as discussed above.
Compound 96 is derived from Kim Formula 2 (paragraph 0030), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
294
512
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kim also teaches that in Formula 2, X is an oxygen atom (paragraph 0032).
Such a modification produces instant compound H7.
Kim includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Kim being a lack of the aforementioned oxygen atom being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known definition for X from the finite list of possible definitions to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound for use as a material in an organic light emitting device which shows a decrease in driving voltage excellent luminance as a function of applied voltage, and improved lifespan (paragraph 0189), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claims 10-12, Kim teaches the compound of claim 1, and Kim also teaches an organic light-emitting device (diode, paragraph 0005) comprising a first and second electrode and an organic layer between the electrodes (paragraph 0029). The organic layer may further comprise an emissive layer, wherein the compound of formula 2, such as compound 96 above, may be used as a host material (paragraph 0095).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound of Kim as a host material in the emissive layer of an organic light-emitting device with the claimed device structure, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claims 14-16, Kim teaches the compound of claim 1, and Kim also teaches an organic light-emitting device (diode, paragraph 0005) comprising a first and second electrode and an organic layer between the electrodes (paragraph 0029), wherein the device is a laminated device and comprises a red, green, and blue emission layer (paragraph 0108), and wherein each emission layer may include a compound of Formula 2, such as compound 96 pictured and discussed above, and a dopant (paragraph 0110). Kim also teaches that the diode comprises at least a hole transport layer (HTL) between the first electrode and the emission layer (EML) and an electron transport layer (ETL) between the EML and the second electrode (paragraph 0017 and Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the compound as a host material in any of the emissive layers of a laminated organic light-emitting device with the claimed device structure, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claim 17, Kim teaches the diode of claim 16, and Kim also teaches that any of the emission layers may additionally comprise an anthracene-based host (paragraph 0058, lines 8-10 and Formula 400 in paragraph 0097), such as the compound below (page 32).
PNG
media_image3.png
150
284
media_image3.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula E when Ar5 is a C10 aryl (naphthyl) group, n is 1, L1 is a C6 arylene (phenylene), and Ar6 is a C6 aryl (phenyl) group.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the above anthracene-based compound as an additional host material in any of the emission layers of a laminated organic light-emitting diode, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claim 20, Kim teaches the diode of claim 11, and Kim also teaches that electron transport layer may be formed using vacuum deposition (paragraph 0117).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form at least one organic layer using a deposition process, as taught by Kim.
With respect to claim 21, Kim teaches the diode of claim 10, and Kim also teaches that the organic light-emitting device may be included in a flat display device (paragraph 0128).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the diode in a flat panel device, as taught by Kim.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2014/0306197 A1) as applied above, and further in view of Cha et al. (KR 2019/0006930 A, using US 2020/0127209 A1 as an official translation and for references, herein after referred to as Cha-KR).
With respect to claim 13, Kim teaches the diode of claim 12, as discussed above.
However, Kim does not teach nor fairly suggest use of a dopant compound which is represented by one of instant Chemical Formulae D1 to D10.
In analogous art, Cha-KR teaches an organic light emitting diode comprising an amine compound of Chemical Formula D1 in a light emitting layer (paragraphs 0061-0062), wherein using the compound in a light emitting layer guarantees improved efficiency, and the compound may be compound 401 (paragraph 0084), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image4.png
368
478
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula D1 when A31 and A32, and E1 are an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), F1 is not present, x1 and y1 are 1, and z1 is 0 so that s13, L29, r13, L-28, p13, L27, Ar25, and Ar26 are not present, s11, s12, r11, r12, p11, and p12 are all 1 and L21 through L26 are a single bond, W is an oxygen atom, W’ is not present, R51 and R52 are an aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl) and together form a spirobifluorene structure, R53 through R59 are not present, and Ar21 through Ar24 are independently an alkyl-substituted or unsubstituted aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Compound 401 of Cha-KR as a dopant in the light emitting layer of Kim in order to a light emitting layer with guaranteed improved efficiency, as taught by Cha-KR.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2014/0306197 A1) as applied above, and further in view of Cha et al. (US 2019/0067588 A1, herein after referred to as Cha-US).
With respect to claim 18, Kim teaches the diode of claim 17, as discussed above.
However, Kim does not teach nor fairly suggest that the anthracene-based compound has the structure of instant Chemical Formula E-1.
In analogous art, Cha-US teaches an amine compound for use in an organic light emitting diode (abstract) which comprises a host-dopant system in the light emitting layer (paragraph 0004).
Cha-US teaches that when a single material is employed as the luminescent material, intermolecular action cause the maximum luminescence wavelength to shift toward a longer wavelength, resulting in a reduction of color purity and light emitting efficiency, however, a host-dopant system works to increase color purty and light emitting efficiency through energy transfer (paragraph 0004).
Cha-US gives an example of a suitable host material through the anthracene compound Chemical Formula 81 (page 16), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image5.png
260
504
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Chemical Formula 81 meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula E-1 when R41 to R48 and R49 to R55 are hydrogen atoms, Ar5 is an aryl of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl), the linking group L is a arylene of 10 carbon atoms (naphthylene), and k is 1.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the anthracene host material of Cha-US as a host material in the second light emitting layer of the diode of Kim in order to increase color purity and light emitting efficiency through energy transfer, as taught by Cha-US.
With respect to claim 19, Kim teaches the diode of claim 17, as discussed above.
However, Kim does not teach nor fairly suggest that the first and second light emitting layers comprise a dopant of one of instant formulae D1 to D10.
In analogous art, Cha-US teaches an amine compound for use in an organic light emitting diode (abstract) which comprises a host-dopant system in the light emitting layer (paragraphs 0004 and 0072) which exhibits high luminescence efficiency (paragraph 0009).
This dopant may be represented by Chemical Formula 15 (page 8), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image6.png
402
520
media_image6.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula D2 when A31 and A32 are an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), E1 and F1 are an alkyl-substituted (t-butyl) aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), x1 and y1 are 1, and both of z1 are 0 so that s13, s14, L29, L32, r13, r14, L-28, L31, p13, p14, L27, L30, Ar25, Ar27, Ar28 and Ar26 are not present, s11, s12, r11, r12, p11, and p12 are all 1 and L21 through L26 are a single bond, W and W’ are an oxygen atom, R51 and R52 are aryl group of 6 carbon atoms, R53 through R59 are not present, and Ar21 through Ar24 are an alkyl-substituted aryl group of 6 carbon atoms (phenyl).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the dopant of Cha-US in the dopant in the light emitting layers of Kim in order to obtain an organic light emitting diode which exhibits high luminescence efficiency, as taught by Cha-US.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US 2012/0097932 A1) – teaches relevant compounds. See for example compounds 6, 11, 18, and 41.
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 RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M..
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 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.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights