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 .
Election/Restrictions
After reconsideration of the requirement of election of species set forth in the Office action dated 01/07/2026, and in an effort to further prosecution, the requirement of election of species is hereby withdrawn.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/16/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 3 it is suggested that "wherein in Formula 1, Formula 2, or Formula 3" be replaced with "wherein in Formula 1, Formula 2, and Formula 3" or "wherein in Formulae 1to 3" for ease of reading; and
in claim 3 it is suggested that "E is, at each occurrence identically or differently, selected from CR1" be changed to read "E is, at each occurrence identically or differently, 1" for ease of reading; and
in claim 3 it is suggested that line 9 be changed to read "ring containing one intracyclic double bond, at least one N atom, and at least one Q;
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 3-5, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18 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.
Regarding Claims 3-5, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18, each recite "preferably" following be an additional, narrower, limitation. The phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted such that the limitation(s) following the phrase are not required.
Claims 4-5 are rejected for being dependent on indefinite claim 3.
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 1 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. US-20210119162-A1 (hereinafter "Gao") in view of Huang et al. US-20070241663-A1 (hereinafter "Huang") and Li et al. CN-110957427-A, see the machine translation referred to herein as "Li-MT".
It is noted that Gao et al. US-20210119162-A1, Huang et al. US-20070241663-A1, and Li et al. CN-110957427-A are each cited on the IDS of 12/16/2025.
Regarding claims 1 and 7-20, Gao teaches an organic electroluminescent device including a first electrode, a second electrode, and at least two light emitting units disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the light emitting units each includes at least one light emitting layer (¶ [0014]-[0016]), wherein a connection layer consisting of a metal layer and a buffer layer is further disposed between at least one set of adjacent two light emitting units, wherein the material of the buffer layer is an organic material (¶ [0017]), and wherein the light emitting unit in contact with the buffer layer further includes a hole injection layer, and the hole injection layer of the light emitting unit in contact with the buffer layer includes the material of the buffer layer (¶ [0018]), as a dopant (¶ [0109]). Gao teaches specific examples of the organic electroluminescent device including Example 8 (¶ [0134]-[0135] referring to ¶ [0113]) wherein the hole injection layer comprises a second organic material and the material of the buffer layer at 3% of the total weight (¶ [0113], page 16). Gao teaches the metal of the metal layer he metal layer has a work function of less than 4 eV (¶ [0097]) and is selected from Yb, Li, Na, K, Rb, Cs, Fr, Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Tb, Th, Dy, Ho, Er, Em, Gd, Lu, Y, Mn, Ag or combinations of more than one of the above metals (¶ [0092], [0109]) and teaches specific examples of the organic electroluminescent device including Example 8 wherein the metal is Yb (¶ [0134]-[0135] referring to ¶ [0113]). Gao teaches wherein at least one of the buffer layer and the metal layer forms a discontinuous film (¶ [0102]). Gao teaches wherein the transmittance of the connection layer in a visible light range is greater than 70% (¶ [0100]). Gao teaches wherein the light emitting layer of the light emitting unit may emit light of the same color or light of different colors (¶ [0075]).
Gao teaches wherein the buffer layer has a thickness ranging from 0.1 nm to 30 nm (¶ [0095]) the metal layer has a thickness ranging from 0.1 nm to 20 nm (¶ [0096]), which overlap with the claimed ranges. 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.
Gao does not specifically disclose wherein the work function of the metal subtracted from the LUMO of the first organic material is less than or equal to 2.1 eV, or less than 2.05 eV.
Huang teaches organic electroluminescent device comprising a multi-layer transparent cathode, wherein the transparent cathode comprises a thin metal layer, a doped buffer layer on the thin metal layer (¶ [0010]). Huang teaches that for electron injection, the work function of the thin metal layer has to match the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) energy level of the organic materials in the neighboring layer (¶ [0006]).
Thus, 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 a metal in the metal layer such that the work function of the metal subtracted from the LUMO of the organic material of the buffer layer is less than or equal to 2.1 eV since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05. In the present invention, one would have been motivated to optimize electron injection.
Gao does not specifically disclose wherein subtracting the LUMO of the first organic material from the HOMO of the second organic material is greater than 0.3 eV and less than 0.8 eV.
Li teaches an organic electroluminescent device comprising an anode interface buffer layer and a hole transport layer (Li-MT, page 2 of 16, lines 20-21) wherein the anode interface buffer layer comprises the hole transport material and P-type dopant material (Li-MT, page 2 of 16, line 22). Li teaches the hole transport material HOMO energy level and the P-type doping material LUMO energy level difference is not greater than 0.4eV (Li-MT, page 2 of 16, lines 25-26), which overlaps with the claimed range, and teaches the hole transport material HOMO energy level is between 5.40 eV and 5.62 eV Li-MT, page 2 of 16, lines 25-28). Li teaches the device the display has improved hole injection and improved carrier balance (Li-MT, page 2 of 16, lines 5-7).
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 select the second organic material of the hole injection layer of Gao such that the second organic material of the hole injection layer HOMO energy level and the organic material of the buffer layer of Gao LUMO energy level difference is not greater than 0.4eV, based on the teaching of Li. The motivation for doing so would have been to obtain improved hole injection and improved carrier balance, as taught by Li.
The range of Li overlaps with the claimed range of greater than 0.3 eV and less than 0.8 eV. 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.
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. US-20210119162-A1 (hereinafter "Gao") in view of Huang et al. US-20070241663-A1 (hereinafter "Huang") and Li et al. CN-110957427-A, see the machine translation referred to herein as "Li-MT" as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Wang et al. US-20200231602-A1.
It is noted that Wang et al. US-20200231602-A1 is cited on the IDS of 12/16/2025.
Regarding claim 2-6, Gao in view of Huang and Li teach the device as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Gao teaches the material of the buffer layer is a compound represented by Formula I (¶ [0077]). However, Gao does not exemplify a compound that meets one of Formula 1 to 3.
Wang teaches an electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a cathode, and an organic layer disposed between the anode and the cathode, wherein the organic layer contains the organic compound of a Formula (I) (¶ [0009], ¶ [0019]). Wang teaches that the organic compound can greatly improve the balance of electron holes and electron transporting of a device, thereby bringing excellent device effects, for example, improving the efficiency and lifetime of the device (¶ [0021]). Wang teaches examples including
PNG
media_image1.png
148
272
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(¶[0092]). The compound of Wang meets Gao's Formula (I).
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 modified the device of Gao by forming the material of the buffer layer is a compound represented by Formula I out of the compound above, as taught by Wang. One would have been motivated to do so because Gao teaches the material of the buffer layer is a compound represented by Formula I for use in a transporting layer of an organic electroluminescent device and Wang teaches the above compound that meets Formula I for use in a transporting layer of an organic electroluminescent device. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. See MPEP § 2144.07.
Additionally, Wang teaches that the organic compound can greatly improve the balance of electron holes and electron transporting of a device, thereby bringing excellent device effects, for example, improving the efficiency and lifetime of the device and therefore forming the buffer layer material in the device of Gao out of the compound of Wang would yield the benefit of improved balance of electron holes and electron, and improved efficiency and lifetime, as described above.
The compound of Wang meets Formula I and corresponds to claimed compound 1-2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Yang et al. WO-2021135841-A1 teaches compounds on page 5-6 including, for example
PNG
media_image2.png
105
163
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(page 5); and Xie et al. US-20240074221-A1 teaches compounds of Formula 15-17 (¶ [0132]) including for example,
PNG
media_image3.png
137
250
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(¶ [0144]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth M. Dahlburg whose telephone number is 571-272-6424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET, and alternate Fridays.
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.
/ELIZABETH M. DAHLBURG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786