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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
Applicants specification suffers from a number of legibility issues regarding the chemical structures. This can be seen in Applicants pre-grant publication US 2023/0209989, where many of the structures do not show clear bonds and the pre-grant publication also shows question marks indicating illegible text. Specifically, such illegible text is found in paragraphs 0016, 0055, and 250-253. Additionally, in paragraph 0066 there are missing bonds in compounds 226-235 and 237 and compounds 266 through 449 have a number of legibility issues. It is suggested that all chemical structures in Applicants specification be replaced with legible structures to avoid any potential delay in prosecution.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to. Specifically, the quality of Chemical Formulae 2-1 through 2-6 is very poor, making variable determination difficult. Applicants need to replace these chemical formulae with legible chemical structures.
Claim 6 is objected to as the quality of the structures recited therein is very poor. Applicants need to replace the compounds of claim 6 with legible chemical structures. Claim 6 is also objected to as “selected from a group consisting of” should be amended to “selected from the group consisting of”.
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.
Claims 1, 3-13, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Independent claim 1 recites that LB is a ligand of Chemical Formula 3. Chemical Formula 3 includes variables Z1 and Z2 which are not defined in claim 1, rendering claim 1 indefinite. Claims 3-13 and 17-19 are included in this rejection as they are dependent on claim 1. Claim 2 is not included in this rejection since claim 2 remedies this deficiency. Claims 14-16 are not included in this rejection as they are dependent from claim 2. Applicants may overcome this rejection by including the subject matter from claim 2 into claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 4, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2020/0328360, cited on Applicants information disclosure statement, filed on 9/27/23).
Claim 1: Lee et al. teaches organometallic compounds, including those of the formula Ir(LA)2(LB) where LA is a ligand which anticipates Chemical Formula 2-3, including, as one example, compound 298 which has the structure
PNG
media_image1.png
174
176
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 93). As applied to Chemical Formula 2-3, this compound has R1-2, R1-4, R4-2, R3-1, R3-2, R2-2, and R2-3 equal to hydrogen, R4-1 equal to an aryl group (p-toluyl), R3-3 equal to a methyl group, and X equal to oxygen. Ligand LB is a bidentate ligand which anticipates Chemical Formula 3 of claim 1.
Claim 4: Compound 4 anticipates claim 4 with m equal to 2 and n equal to 1.
Claims 7-9: The compounds taught by Lee et al., which include compound 298 above, are employed as phosphorescent dopants in organic electroluminescent devices. The exemplified devices are taught to comprise an anode, a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an emission layer comprising a host and said phosphorescent dopant, an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode (paragraphs 0336-0339). The employment of any one of the explicitly taught compounds of Lee et al., including compound 298 above in the manner taught in the device examples is at once envisaged. A device comprising compound 298 in an emission layer as a phosphorescent dopant anticipates all of the device and structural limitations of claims 7-9.
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 of this title, 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.
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 2, 3, 5, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2020/0328360) as applied to claim 1 above.
Claims 2 and 14-16: While Lee et al. does not explicitly teach an organometallic complex which has a ligand satisfying those recited in claim 21, the overall teachings of Lee et al. render obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to prepare compounds which are analogous to those exemplified with the exception that they have a ligand LB which satisfies Chemical Formula 4 of claim 2. Lee et al. explicitly teaches organometallic complexes of the formula M(L1)n1(L2)n2 where n1 is equal to 1, 2, or 3 and n2 is equal to 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 (paragraphs 0008-0014). Ligand LB is taught to include those ligands taught in paragraph 0134 with more specific ligands being taught in paragraph 0161 and compounds 468 and 469 employing 2-phenylpyridine ligands as ligand L2 of Lee et al. All of the ligands 3-1(1) to 3-1(66) taught in paragraph 0161 are phenylpyridine-based ligands which when Z1 is selected to be hydrogen or a C1-5 alkyl group, satisfy all of the limitations of Chemical Formula 4 of claim 1. Given these overall teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have selected 2-phenylpyridine-based ligands as ligand L2 of Lee et al. as Lee et al. explicitly teaches that said ligands are alternative and are interchangeable ligands, which motivates a person having ordinary skill in the art to employ such ligands with a reasonable expectation of success. 2-Phenylpyridine ligands are a predictable variation among a finite number of art recognized alternatives. The motivation to employ 2-phenylpyridine ligands stems from the prior art’s own suggestion that 2-phenylpyridine ligands are a suitable alternative, as well as the general desire to explore the disclosed scope of ligands of Lee et al. Because 2-phenylpyridine ligands are disclosed in the same context as the acetylacetonate-based ligands of Lee et al. a person having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation that the resulting 2-phenylpyridine-containing metal complexes would function similarly. Employing a compound such as compound 298 as described in claim 1 above with a 2-phenypyridine-based ligand in the manner exemplified in the device examples results in a device which satisfies all of the structural and device limitations of claims 14-16 for the same reasons as claims 7-9.
Claims 3 and 17-19: Claim 3 is drawn to embodiments where m is 1 and n is 2. Given the overall teachings of Lee et al. it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to prepare heteroleptic and homoleptic iridium complexes. Specifically, Lee et al. teaches that n1 in formula 1 of Lee et al. is equal to 1, 2, or 3 and n2 is equal to 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4. Given this teaching, it would have been prima facie obvious to prepare iridium complexes having 1, 2, or 3 ligands which satisfy Formula 2 of Lee et al. and 0, 1, or 2 ligands which satisfy any one of Formulae 3A to 3F of Lee et al. (paragraph 0134). Employing an analog of compound 298 above where the compound has one acetylacetonate ligand in the manner taught in the device examples results in a device which satisfies all of the structural and device limitations of claims 17-19.
Claim 5: Claim 5 recites that variable m is 3 and variable n is zero. For the same reasons as described in claim 3 above, it would have been prima facie obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to have prepared homoleptic iridium complexes having three ligands which satisfy Formula 2. Lee et al. further exemplifies heteroleptic iridium complexes (compound 454).
Claims 10 and 11: While Lee et al. does not exemplify a stacked light-emitting device having two or three light-emitting stacks, Lee et al. teaches that when the organic light-emitting device is a full-color organic light-emitting device, the emission layer may be patterned into a red pixel, a green pixel, and/or a blue pixel. Alternatively, the light-emitting device may be a stacked structure including a red emission layer, a green emission layer, and/or a blue emission layer, and the emission layer may emit white light (paragraph 0222). Given this teaching, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to have prepared a stacked/tandem white-light emitting device having a red, green, and blue light-emitting stack. Employment of the compounds taught by Lee et al. would serve in the green emitting stack. All of the exemplified phosphorescent dopants in Table 3 have a maximum emission wavelength between 500-570 nm which is what is considered to be the green emitting portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. It would be expected that the compounds taught by Lee et al., including compound 298 above, would also inherently be a green emitting compound, if for no other reason, that it satisfies all of the structural limitations of claim 1. A chemical compound and its properties are inseparable.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2020/0328360) in view of Choi et al. (Nature Communications 2020, 2732), as applied to claim 7.
While Lee et al. does not explicitly teach a display device comprising a substrate and a driving element with the organic light-emitting device connected to the driving element as recited in claim 12, the teaching that full color displays which comprise individual red, green, and/or blue pixels as taught by Lee et al. in paragraph 0222 render obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art given the teachings of Choi et al. Lee et al. and Choi et al. are combinable as they are both from the same field of endeavor of organic electroluminescent display devices. Choi et al. teaches that for stacked light-emitting devices thin-film transistors are electrically coupled to the light-emitting device. The thin-film transistor serves as a driving element which allows for control of each individual pixel, allowing for one to adjust the brightness of each individual pixel. The device construct shown in Fig. 5 of Choi et al. has been echoed in the prior art countless times and a teaching for preparing a display device renders obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to employ a driving element so as to control each individual pixel in said display device.
Comment on Patentability
While all claims stand rejected, claims 6 and 13 are free of any prior art rejections. The compounds taught by Lee et al. above (as well as those related prior art references of record and cited on the PTO-892 form) require an aromatic group which is directly bonded to the thiophene ring. None of the explicitly taught compounds recited in claims 6-13 share this structural feature. The aryl groups present on the thiophene ring is a required structural feature of Lee et al. and the references of record.
Relevant Art Cited
Additional prior art documents which are relevant to Applicants invention can be found on the attached PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S LOEWE whose telephone number is (571)270-3298. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1302. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Robert S Loewe/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
1 The ligands of chemical formula 5 are required to have all C1-C5 alkyl groups substituted with either halogen or deuterium.