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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to the amendment received on 6 July 2026. Claims 1-4 are amended, and claims 5-10 are cancelled. Claims 1-10 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s certified English language translation of the priority document of JP Application No. 2020-137612 is necessary to perfect the foreign priority claim.
The objection to the drawings as set forth in the previous Office Action is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 6 June 2026. The objection is withdrawn.
The objection to the specification as set forth in the previous Office Action is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 6 July 2026. The objection is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1-4, 6-8, and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yokoyama et al. (WO2016006629A1, hereinafter "Yokoyama") is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 6 July 2026. The rejection is withdrawn.
The rejection of claims 1 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama et al. (WO2016006629A1, hereinafter "Yokoyama") in view of Kim et al. (WO2020231214A1, hereinafter "Kim") is overcome due to the Applicant’s amendment dated 6 July 2026. The rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument filed 6 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to the Yokoyama reference (WO2016006629A1), applicant points out that Yokoyama does not disclose or suggest the feature of a composition formed by p-doping a radialene derivative into an arylamine compound having only one triphenylamine structure. New rejections based on Yokoyama rely on a different embodiment or a reinterpretation of the reference. As shown in the rejection below, Yokoyama still renders obvious the claimed invention.
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 1-4, 6-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama et al. (WO2016006629A1, hereinafter "Yokoyama '629") in view of Yokoyama et al. (WO2016111254, hereinafter "Yokoyama'254"). Note that a machine-generated translation is provided with this office action.
Yokoyama '629 discloses, in the pertinent art of organic electroluminescent devices, an organic light-emitting element named Example 40 having the structure of anode, a hole injection layer, a first hole transport layer, a second hole transport layer, a light emitting layer, an electron transport layer, and a cathode (¶ [0251]). Yokoyama '629 discloses that the second hole transport layer contains arylamine compound 1-1, and the light emitting layer contains compounds EMD-1, containing a pyrene core, and EMH-1, containing an anthracene core, shown below (¶ [0255] – [0256]).
PNG
media_image1.png
565
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Compound 1-1 of Yokoyama '629 is a compound of instant General Formula (1) claim 1 wherein,
R1 is H;
R2 is H;
R3 is para-unsubstituted 6 carbon aromatic ring or phenyl;
R4 is para-unsubstituted 6 carbon aromatic ring or phenyl;
L is divalent 6 carbon aromatic ring or “1,4-phenylene” and;
R5-R7 are hydrogen.
Yokoyama '629 recites that the light emitting layer can be formed using a host and dopant system wherein the dopant material is blue-emitting such as pyrene derivatives (¶ [0058]). Therefore, the light-emitting layer of Yokoyama’s '629 example 40 contains a pyrene derivative as the dopant compound capable of blue light emission. Applicant bears responsibility for proving that the reference composition does not possess the characteristics recited in the claims.
Yokoyama '629 teaches that the Example 40 has a hole injection layer of the compound with the structural formula (HIM-1), which is a fused polycyclic heteroaromatic structure (¶ [0251] – [0254]). However, Yokoyama '629 does not necessarily limit the hole injection layer material to be the compound HIM-1. Yokoyama '629 teaches the hole injection layer may be formed using materials that are known in themselves such as starburst-type triphenylamine derivatives and arylamine compounds represented by the general formula 1, wherein compounds represented by the general formula 1 “exhibit high hole mobility such that the hole injection layer can also be formed using such arylamine compounds” (¶ [0097]).
Yokoyama '629 teaches that the arylamine compound represented by general formula 1 is a novel compound with good hole injection characteristics, a stable thin film state, and excellent heat resistance, and that the organic EL device containing an arylamine compound enables light emission at high efficiency, low driving voltage, and extended lifespan (¶ [0028]).
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 further include the compound 1-2 which is a compound of the Formula 1 of Yokoyama '629 in the hole injection layer of the light-emitting device of Yokoyama '629, based on the teachings of Yokoyama '629. The motivation for doing so would have been to obtain a device with light emission at high efficiency, low driving voltage, and extended lifespan as taught by Yokoyama '629 (¶ [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further include the compound 1-2 which is a compound of the Formula 1 of Yokoyama '629 in the hole injection layer of the light-emitting device of Yokoyama '629 because it would have been choosing a known and acceptable compound for the hole injection layer, which would have been a choice from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions of a compound useful as the material in the hole injection layer of the light-emitting device of Yokoyama '629 and possessing the benefits taught by Yokoyama '629. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to produce additional devices comprising the Formula 1 as a material in the hole injection layer having the benefits of high efficiency, low driving voltage, and extended lifespan as taught by Yokoyama '629 (¶ [0028]) in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.I.(E).
Formula 1
Compound 1-2
PNG
media_image2.png
502
683
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
610
655
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Yokoyama '629 teaches the above Modified Example 40, however, Yokoyama '629 fails to teach hole injection layer formed by p-doping a radialene derivative.
In the relevant art of organic light-emitting devices, Yokoyama ‘254 teaches an organic light-emitting device containing an arylamine compound similar to Yokoyama ‘629 (Description pg 1-3). Yokoyama ‘254 teaches that the “hole injection layer of the organic EL device of the present invention examples of the electron acceptor doped in the arylamine compound represented by the general formula (1) include radialene derivatives (see, for example, Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication No. 2011-100621), and the like, are preferably used” (Description pg 26). Yokoyama ‘254 teaches that an organic light-emitting device with an arylamine compound doped with an electron acceptor used as the material of the hole injection layer can obtain high luminous efficiency and long life (Description pg 234).
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 further include the radialene doped derivative in the hole injection layer of the Modified Example 40 of Yokoyama ‘629, based on the teachings of Yokoyama ‘254. The motivation for doing so would have been to obtain a device with high luminous efficiency and long life, as taught by Yokoyama ‘254 (Description pg 234).
The resulting Modified Example 40 II reads on claims 1 and 3 wherein R3 is an unsubstituted phenyl group. The resulting Modified Example 40 II reads on claim 6 wherein R5 to R7 is H.
Regarding claim 2, the Modified Example 40 II does not teach a compound of formula 1 wherein R3 is a silyl group. Yokoyama ‘254 teaches a general formula 5a (Description pg 26) wherein Ar10 is defined as a substituted or unsubstituted phenyl group (Description pg 29) where substituted is defined as the same definition for Ar1 to Ar4 (Description pg 30) which includes silyl groups such as trimethylsilyl and triphenylsilyl groups.
PNG
media_image4.png
521
442
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 substitute Ar10 as a substituted phenyl wherein the substituent is triphenylsilyl group in the compound 1-1 in the Modified Device Example 40 II of Yokoyama, because it would have been choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions for Ar10 of a compound useful as the compound in the organic layer of the light-emitting device of Yokoyama and possessing the benefits taught by Yokoyama ‘254. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to produce additional compounds represented by Ar10 in the formula 5a having the benefits of high luminous efficiency and long life, as taught by Yokoyama ‘254 (Description pg 234) in order to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.I.(E).
The resulting Modified Example 40 III with the Modified Compound 1-1 shown below reads on instant claims 2 and 5 wherein R3 is a silyl group with 18 ring forming carbon atoms or 3 phenyl groups.
Compound 1-1
Modified Compound 1-1
PNG
media_image1.png
565
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
200
400
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Yokoyama ‘629 discloses an organic light-emitting device “example 41” which is fabricated in the same manner as in example 40, described above, except that compound 1-4, shown below, replaces compound 1-1 (¶ [0260]).
PNG
media_image6.png
685
690
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Compound 1-4 of Yokoyama ‘629 is a compound of instant General Formula (1) claim 1 wherein,
R1 is unsubstituted 6 carbon aromatic ring or phenyl;
R2 is H;
R3 is para-unsubstituted 6 carbon aromatic ring or phenyl;
R4 is para-unsubstituted 6 carbon aromatic ring or phenyl;
L is divalent 6 carbon aromatic ring or “1,4-phenylene” and;
R5-R7 are hydrogen.
Regarding claims 8 and 10, Yokoyama ‘629 recites that the light emitting layer can be formed using a host and dopant system wherein the dopant material is blue-emitting such as pyrene derivatives (¶ [0058]). Therefore, the light-emitting layer of Yokoyama’s example 40 contains a pyrene derivative such as EMD-1 as the dopant compound capable of blue light emission. Yokoyama’s example 40 contains EMH-1 which is an anthracene skeleton. Applicant bears responsibility for proving that the reference composition does not possess the characteristics recited in the claims.
Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama '629 (WO2016006629A1) and Yokoyama '254 (WO2016111254) as applied to claims 1-8 and 10 as described above in view of Kim et al. (WO2020231214A1, hereinafter "Kim").
Yokoyama ‘629 and Yokoyama ‘254 teaches Modified Example 40 III with the Modified Compound 1-1 and the Compound 1-4 as applied to instant claims 1-8 and 10 described above. However, Yokoyama ‘629 and Yokoyama ‘254 fails to teach a compound of instant claim 9 general formula (2) or (3) as a blue light emitting dopant.
In the relevant art of organic light emitting devices, Kim teaches the organic light emitting device may have a structure of substrate, anode, organic matter layer, and cathode (Figure 1, ¶ [20-25]). Kim further teaches that the organic layer comprises a hole transport material, electron transport material, electron barrier material, and light-emitting material (¶ [7] – [18]). Kim teaches that the hole transport material may be a triarylamine compound (¶ [100] – [101]). Kim teaches that the preferred embodiment of the invention comprises a blue luminescent dopant material and a blue luminescent host material for the blue-luminescent light-emitting layer, wherein the blue luminescent material may contain pyrene, anthracene, boron following Formula 5, or a compound following Formula 6, shown below (¶ [16], [118] – [191]).
PNG
media_image7.png
962
1899
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Kim further teaches a specific compound of Formula 5 including compound BD22 shown below (¶ [360]).
PNG
media_image8.png
756
961
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Compound BD22 is a compound of instant general formula 2 claim 9 wherein:
X2 is B;
Y1 is S;
Y2 and Y3 is N-R8 wherein;
R8 is a substituted aromatic group of 6 carbon or “phenyl”;
the phenyl is substituted at the para position with tert-butyl;
Q1 is substituted phenyl with tert-butyl;
Q2 is substituted phenyl with tert-butyl and;
Q3 is substituted phenyl with methyl.
Kim further teaches compound BD22 inside an organic light-emitting device that displays high efficiency and long lifetime (Table 4).
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 substitute the blue light emitting dopant in the Modified Example 40 III of Yokoyama with compound BD22 of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve the device efficiency and lifespan as taught by Kim. The resulting modified light-emitting device of Yokoyama and Kim reads on instant claim 9.
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 LUCAS Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Fridays 7:45 am to 12:00 pm.
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.
/JENNIFER A BOYD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1786
/L.Q.N./ Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights