DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/07/2026 has been entered. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Elected Species
PNG
media_image1.png
697
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A search of the prior art did not show the elected species. As no claims where specifically drawn to applicants’ elected species in independent form, no claims have been indicated as allowable. Claims written in independent form which require all the limitations of the elected species along with any dependent claims which require all the limitations of the elected species would be allowable. Under MPEP 803.02, the search was again expanded to find an examinable species.
Examinable Species
The examinable species is represented by Compound 48 (page 40):
PNG
media_image2.png
386
686
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compound 48 reads on the first compound. Compound 48 reads on claims 1-2, 5, 7, 15-20. Claims 4, 6, 8-10, 14, 22-24 are withdrawn from consideration in this office action as not reading on the examinable species.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7, 15-17, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okada (US 2004/0194073 A1) as evidenced by Suzuri (US 2004/0005404 A1).
Regarding Claims 1-2, 5, 7, 15-17, 20, Okada teaches an organic electroluminescent element provided with: at least a pair of opposite electrodes; and one or more organic compound layers sandwiched between the pair of opposite electrodes, wherein at least one layer of the organic compound layers contains an organic compound represented by the general formula (3) (paragraph 27). Formula 3 can be represented by Compound 48 (page 40):
PNG
media_image2.png
386
686
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Compound 48 (dopant, per claim 17) along with a host are used in the light emitting layer (paragraph 96) which is viewed as a composition or formulation.
Okada fails to mention emission at room temperature nor does Okada teach away from room temperature. Suzuri teaches a phosphorescent dopant is preferably a compound capable of emitting phosphorescence at room temperature, for example, an iridium complex, a platinum complex or a europium complex, but is not limited thereto (paragraph 70).
The office views the above a generic teaching that a iridium complex is capable emission at room temperature, absent unexpected results. Therefore, the office takes the position the Compound 48 can emit light at room temperature.
Compound 48 reads on applicants’ organometallic complex wherein G1 is a methylene group; G2 is a non-aromatic bicyclo(butyl)cyclohexane; M is Ir; there are two groups present (per claims 1-2, 5, 15, 20).
Compound 48 shows
PNG
media_image3.png
266
136
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(per claim 6).
Compound 48 show L1 as the carbazole containing ligand and L2 and the acetyl based ligand (per claim 7).
Regarding Claim 16, Okada teaches the device can be used to make a partial color display, a multiple color display, a full color display (paragraph 109). This is viewed as inclusive of lighting panel (per claim 16).
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 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada (US 2004/0194073 A1) in view of Xia (US 2014/0264292).
Regarding Claims 18-19, Okada teaches Compound 48 (dopant) along with a host are used in the light emitting layer (paragraph 96) but fails to mention applicants’ host material.
Xia teaches a compound that comprises triphenylene, carbazole and at least one spacer linkage between triphenylene and carbazole is disclosed as a host material for PHOLEDs that enhances the lifetime of PHOLEDs (paragraph 35). A specific examples is represented by Compound 2 (page 6):
PNG
media_image4.png
218
430
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of invention to have used a known host material since Xia teaches Compound 2 which reads on the instant limitations would be expected to improve lifetimes, absent unexpected results (per claim 19).
Response to Amendment
New art applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY D CLARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7087. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-4PM M-F.
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 Chriss can be reached on 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 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.
/GREGORY D CLARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786