DETAILED ACTION
The following Office action concerns Patent Application Number 18/024,688. Claims 1-21 are pending in the application.
Claims 3, 5-13, 18, 21 have been withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to non-elected inventions or species.
The applicant’s amendment filed June 30, 2026 has been entered.
The previous rejection under 35 USC 112 is withdrawn in light of the applicant’s amendment.
The previous rejection under 35 USC 103 is maintained in this action and discussed below.
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 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, 2, 4, 14-17, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Sasada et al (US 2020/0136062) in view of Sasada et al (US 2019/0214569).
Sasada (‘062) teaches a light emitting device comprising an anode and a cathode and two organic layers between the anode and cathode (par. 6). The first organic layer contains a compound and the second organic layer contains a compound and crosslinked body having a cross-linkable group (par. 6). The compounds are not required to contain a transition metal, which satisfies claimed condition (iii) (par. 6-10).
Sasada (‘062) does not teach the energy difference between lowest triplet excited state and the lowest singlet excited state (condition (i)).
However, Sasada (‘569) teaches a light emitting device having an anode and a cathode and an organic layer between the anode and cathode (par. 7). The organic layer contains a compound wherein the absolute value of the difference between the energy level of the lowest triplet excited state and the energy level of the lowest singlet excited state is 0.5 eV or less, which satisfies condition (i) (par. 8, 102). The device provides excellent external quantum efficiency (par. 5, 102).
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine triplet-singlet energy difference of Sasada (‘569) with the light emitting device of Sasada (‘062) in order to obtain excellent external quantum efficiency.
Regarding claims 2 and 4, Sasada (‘062) teaches that the crosslinked material includes a polymer containing a cross-linkable group (par. 49-50). The polymer further contains a constitutional unit having the structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
138
351
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(par. 53). The above structure satisfies claimed formula (Y).
Regarding claims 14-17, the first organic layer further comprises a phosphorescent compound (par. 23). The phosphorescent compound includes:
PNG
media_image2.png
185
275
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(par. 24). Ring L1 includes pyridine and Ring L2 includes benzene (par. 36-37).
The two organic layers are adjacent (p. 94, claim 14). The second layer is disposed between the anode and the first layer (p. 94, claim 15).
Response to Arguments
The applicant argues that the examiner does not explain how to achieve the claimed singlet-triplet energy gap. However, the claimed singlet-triplet energy gap is well known in the art and is disclosed in numerous references including Sasada et al (‘569). Therefore, the applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Conclusion
No new ground of rejection was 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Examiner’s Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Young whose telephone number is (571) 270-5078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:30 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew, can be reached at 571-272-2817. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000./WILLIAM D YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 July 7, 2026
Prosecution Insights