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 .
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed August 6, 2026, which amends claims 1, 10, 14, and 19. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment of the claims, filed August 6, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as set forth in the Office action mailed May 6, 2026.
Applicant’s amendment of the claims, filed August 6, 2026, caused the withdrawal of the rejection of claims 1-18 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun et al. (US 2016/0365517) in view of Choi et al. (US 2020/0212319) as set forth in the Office action mailed May 6, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun et al. (US 2019/0051836) (hereafter “Mun”) in view of Choi et al. (US 2020/0212319).
Regarding claims 1-18 and 20, Mun teaches an electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an emission auxiliary layer, an emission layer, an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a cathode (paragraphs [0266]-[0277]) (claims 1 and 15-17). Mun teaches that the emission auxiliary layer can be composed of carbazole-amine compounds and a few of the examples are
PNG
media_image1.png
217
228
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image2.png
200
231
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image3.png
194
240
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, and
PNG
media_image4.png
181
252
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(these compounds are the same as compounds 1-49, 1-50, 1-53, and 1-55) (paragraphs [0091] and [0266]-[0277], Table 5) (claims 1 and 10-14). Mun teaches that the emission layer emits red light (paragraph [0277]) (claim 18). Mun teaches that the light emitting layer comprises a host material and a dopant and the dopant is an iridium metal complex that emits through phosphorescent (paragraphs [0266]-[0277]) (claim 1).
Mun does not specifically teach a red metal complex that meets applicant’s claimed formula 1.
Choi teaches iridium metal complexes for use as red light emitting compounds that emit through phosphorescent in the light emitting layers of electroluminescent devices (paragraphs [0406]-[0411], Tables 3 and 4) (claim 18). Choi teaches that the metal complexes can have the following structure,
PNG
media_image5.png
167
224
media_image5.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image6.png
147
240
media_image6.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image7.png
170
212
media_image7.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image8.png
162
232
media_image8.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image9.png
171
247
media_image9.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image10.png
174
261
media_image10.png
Greyscale
, and
PNG
media_image11.png
167
232
media_image11.png
Greyscale
are a few examples (these compounds are the same as applicant’s compounds 1, 4, 6, 9, 18, 23, and 28) (paragraphs [0180] and [0406]-[0412], Tables 3 and 4) (claims 1-9). Choi teaches that when these compounds are used as the red emitting material the device has an improved external quantum efficiency, a narrower FWHM, and improved lifetime (paragraph [0411], Tables 3 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mun to use the red emitting phosphorescent dopants of Choi. The motivation would have been to provide a red emitting device and an improve lifetime and external quantum efficiency and has a narrow FWHM.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun et al. (US 2019/0051836) (hereafter “Mun”) in view of Choi et al. (US 2020/0212319) as applied to claims 1-18 and 20 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2014/0374722) (hereafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 19, Mun teaches that the hole transporting layer is composed of NPD (paragraph [0267]).
Mun in view of Choi does not teach where the hole transporting layer is composed of a compound that meets applicant’s formula 201 or formula 202.
Kim teaches hole transporting materials that can be used in electroluminescent devices (paragraphs [0073] and [0204]). Kim teaches that the hole transporting material can be
PNG
media_image12.png
185
250
media_image12.png
Greyscale
, which is one of many examples (paragraphs [0073] and [0204]). Kim teaches that when
PNG
media_image12.png
185
250
media_image12.png
Greyscale
is used instead of NPD as the hole transporting material the resulting device has improved lifetime and efficiency (paragraph [0207], Table 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mun in view of Choi, so the hole transporting material was
PNG
media_image12.png
185
250
media_image12.png
Greyscale
as taught by Kim. The motivation would have been to improve the efficiency and lifetime of the device.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANDREW K BOHATY whose telephone number is (571)270-1148. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-4pm.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at (571)272-1234. 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.
/ANDREW K BOHATY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights