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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 1-25 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 claim 1: Claim 1 recites the limitation that “… provided that in the case where Rc and Rd are not bonded to each other not to form a substituted or unsubstituted ring, at least one of Rc and Rd represents a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group having 1 to 30 carbon atoms …” The phrase “where Rc and Rd are not bonded to each other not to form a substituted or unsubstituted ring” is difficult to understand, rendering the limitation unclear. Therefore, the claim is indefinite.
For the purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted such that when Rc and Rd are not bonded to each other and thus no ring is formed from the bonding together of Rc and Rd, then at least one of Rc and Rd represents a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group having 1 to 30 carbon atoms.
Additionally, claim 1 recites the limitation that “… Rc and Rd are not bonded to each other not to form a substituted or unsubstituted ring fluorene ring with a carbon atom at the 9-postion of the fluorene skeleton”. The phrase “Rc and Rd are not bonded to each other not to form a substituted or unsubstituted ring fluorene ring with a carbon atom at the 9-postion of the fluorene skeleton” is difficult to understand, rendering the limitation unclear. Therefore, the claim is indefinite.
For the purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted such that Rc and Rd are not bonded to each other to form a substituted or unsubstituted ring fluorene ring with a carbon atom at the 9-postion of the fluorene skeleton.
Regarding claims 2-25: Claims 2-25 are rejected due to their dependency from 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cha et al. (US 2018/0123042 A1) (hereafter “Cha ‘042”).
Regarding claims 1, 3-9, and 12-13: Cha ‘042 discloses the compound shown below {(paragraph [0009]: The compounds of the disclosure of Cha ‘042 have the structure of Chemical Formula 1.), (paragraph [0125]: The compounds having the structure of Chemical Formula 1 of Cha ‘042 are exemplified by the compounds on pp. 6-16.), (p. 10, the compound shown below)}.
PNG
media_image1.png
732
660
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Cha ‘042 teaches that the compounds having the structure of Chemical Formula 1 of Cha ‘042 is useful as the material of a hole transporting layer of an organic light emitting device {paragraphs [0136]-[0138]}.
Regarding claims 3-4: Cha ‘042 discloses all of the features with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
Furthermore, the compound of Cha ‘042 shown above meets the limitations of claims 3-4 in the case where Ar1 is not represented by a group of the instant formula (1a) or (1f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 14-17 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (US 2018/0123042 A1) (hereafter “Cha ‘042”).
Regarding claims 14-16, 19-20, and 22: Cha ‘042 discloses all of the features with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
Cha ‘042 does not disclose a specific device comprising the compound of Cha ‘042 shown above.
However, Cha ‘042 teaches an organic electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a cathode, and organic layers intervening between the anode and the cathode {Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0136], [0138], [0141], [0180], and [0182]}. The organic layers including a light emitting layer as well as a hole transporting zone between the anode and the light emitting layer {Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0136], [0138], [0141], [0180], and [0182]}. The hole transporting zone comprising a hole injection layer, a hole transporting layer, and an electron blocking layer {Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0136], [0138], [0141], [0180], and [0182]}. The electron blocking layer is in contact with the light emitting layer {Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0136], [0138], [0141], [0180], and [0182]}. The light emitting layer is a single layer {Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0136], [0138], [0141], [0180], and [0182]}.
Cha ‘042 teaches that the compounds having the structure of Chemical Formula 1 of Cha ‘042 is useful as the material of a hole transporting layer or electron blocking layer of an organic light emitting device {paragraphs [0136]-[0138]}.
Cha ‘042 teaches that the compounds of Cha ‘042 when used as materials of organic electroluminescent devices enable devices having lower driving voltage, improved efficiency, and enhanced service life {paragraphs [0032], [0258], and [0264]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the compound of Cha ‘042 above such that it was used as the material of the hole transporting layer or electron blocking layer of the device of Cha ‘042 described above. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum combinations of materials to be used to make an organic light-emitting device in order to produce optimal organic light-emitting devices, which in this case means using other compounds of Cha ‘042 taught by Cha ‘042 to enable devices having lower driving voltage, improved efficiency, and enhanced service life.
In the resultant device, the hole injection layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer; the hole transporting layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with the instant second hole transporting layer; and the electron blocking layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with the instant third hole transporting layer. Each of the hole injection layer of Cha ‘042, the hole transporting layer of Cha ‘042 and the electron blocking layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with a hole transporting layer, because each must necessarily transport holes.
Regarding claim 21: Cha ‘042 teaches all of the features with respect to claim19, as outlined above.
Cha ‘042 does not teach a specific device comprising the compound of Cha ‘042 described above as well as specific thicknesses for the hole injection layer of Cha ‘042 and the hole transport layer of Cha ‘042, which can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer and the instant second hole transporting layer, respectively.
However, the example devices of Cha ‘042 have a hole injection layer thickness of 50 nm, and a hole transport layer thickness of 30 nm {paragraphs [0239]-[0241], [0246]-[0253], and [0259]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device taught by Cha ‘042 as described above by making the hole injection layer thickness of the device of Cha ‘042 to be 50 nm, and hole transport layer thickness of the device of Cha ‘042 to be 30 nm, based on the teaching of Cha ‘042. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum device structures in order to produce optimal organic light-emitting devices, which in this case would be use the layer thicknesses described above as parameters when creating devices of Cha ‘042 having the benefits of the devices of Cha ‘042.
Regarding claims 16-17: Cha ‘042 teaches all of the features with respect to claim 15, as outlined above.
Cha ‘042 does not teach a specific device comprising the compound of Cha ‘042 described above within the electron blocking layer.
However, Cha ‘042 teaches that the compounds of the disclosure of Cha ‘042 are useful as the material of an electron blocking layer {paragraphs [0136], [0140], [0242], and [0246]-[0253]}.
However, Cha ‘042 teaches that the compounds having the structure of Chemical Formula 1 of Cha ‘042 are useful as the material of a hole transporting layer or electron blocking layer of an organic light emitting device {paragraphs [0136]-[0138]}.
Cha ‘042 teaches that the compounds of Cha ‘042 when used as materials of organic electroluminescent devices enable devices having lower driving voltage, improved efficiency, and enhanced service life {paragraphs [0032], [0258], and [0264]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the compound of Cha ‘042 above such that it was used as the material of the electron blocking layer of the device of Cha ‘042 described above. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum combinations of materials to be used to make an organic light-emitting device in order to produce optimal organic light-emitting devices, which in this case means using other compounds of Cha ‘042 taught by Cha ‘042 to enable devices having lower driving voltage, improved efficiency, and enhanced service life.
In the resultant device, the hole injection layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer; the hole transporting layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with the instant third hole transporting layer; and the electron blocking layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with the instant second hole transporting layer. Each of the hole injection layer of Cha ‘042, the hole transporting layer of Cha ‘042 and the electron blocking layer of Cha ‘042 can be equated with a hole transporting layer, because each must necessarily transport holes. The electron blocking layer of Cha ‘042—which is being equated with the instant second hole transporting layer—is in direct contact with the light emitting layer. Neither of claims 16 or 17 require any specific order of the layers being equated with the instant first hole transporting layer or the instant second hole transporting layer.
Regarding claim 19: Cha ‘042 teaches all of the features with respect to claim19, as outlined above.
Cha ‘042 does not teach a specific device comprising the compound of Cha ‘042 described above as well as specific thicknesses for the hole injection layer of Cha ‘042 and the electron blocking layer of Cha ‘042, which can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer and the instant second hole transporting layer, respectively, as described above.
However, the example devices of Cha ‘042 have a hole injection layer thickness of 50 nm, and an electron blocking layer thickness of 10 nm {paragraphs [0239]-[0241], [0246]-[0253], and [0259]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device taught by Cha ‘042 as described above by making the hole injection layer thickness of the device of Cha ‘042 to be 50 nm, and electron blocking layer thickness of the device of Cha ‘042 to be 10 nm, based on the teaching of Cha ‘042. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum device structures in order to produce optimal organic light-emitting devices, which in this case would be use the layer thicknesses described above as parameters when creating devices of Cha ‘042 having the benefits of the devices of Cha ‘042.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (US 2018/0123042 A1) (hereafter “Cha ‘042”) in view of Nie et al. (US 2023/0146030 A1) (hereafter “Nie”).
Regarding claim 10: Cha ‘042 discloses all of the features with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
The compound of Cha ‘042 does not comprise groups equivalent to the instant Rc and Rd are bonded to each other to form a spiro ring.
Nie teaches compounds useful as materials for a hole transporting layer in an organic light emitting device, having the structure of Formula 1 of Nie, shown below {abstract, paragraphs [0006]-[0007], [0026-[0027], [0038], and [0116]}.
PNG
media_image2.png
384
668
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Where ring A is an additional spiro bonded 5- to 16-membered aliphatic hydrocarbon ring; Ar1 can be an aryl group having 6 to 30 carbon atoms; and L1 to L3 can be arylene or a direct bond {paragraphs [0008]-[0010] and [0028]-[0030]}. Ar1 can be phenanthryl {paragraph [0111]}.
Nie teaches that the compounds of the disclosure of Nie have large-steric-hindrance cycloalkyl group that is spiro-bonded to a fluorene, so that planar triarylamine is not easy to stack and has improved hole mobility, reducing the driving voltage of a device using the compound. Furthermore, the compounds have excellent thermal stability, and they enable organic electroluminescent devices having good service life and improved efficiency {paragraphs [0018] and [0038]}.
Nie teaches compounds comprising two fluorenyl groups, each comprising a spiro bonded adamantane group {paragraphs [0040] and [0114] and pp. 41-42, Compounds 97-104}.
The compounds of Cha ‘042 differ from the compounds of Nie only in that the fluorenyl groups of the compounds of Cha ‘042 do not comprise spiro bonded adamantane groups {paragraphs [0008]-[0010], [0028]-[0030], and [0111]}
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the compound of Cha ‘042 shown above by substituting spiro bonded adamantane groups onto the fluorenyl groups of the compound of Cha ‘042, based on the teaching of Nie. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide compounds with excellent thermal stability, that do not stacking, have improved hole mobility, and enable organic electroluminescent devices having reduced driving voltage, good service life, and improved efficiency, as taught by Nie.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (US 2018/0123042 A1) (hereafter “Cha ‘042”) in view of Li et al. (US 2002/0076576 A1) (hereafter “Li”).
Regarding claim 11: Cha ‘042 discloses all of the features with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
The compound of Cha ‘042 does not comprise any deuterium atoms.
Li teaches organic light-emitting electronic devices containing conjugated material wherein one or more hydrogens have been replaced with deuterium {abstract}. Li teaches that when deuterium is substituted for hydrogen on organic semiconductors compounds, the deuterated compounds possess improved thermal stability and longer lifetime in optoelectronic devices due to the stronger nature of the C-D bond relative to the C-H bond {p. 2, ¶ [0009], lines 11-13}. Li teaches that the compounds can be fully deuterated {paragraphs [0025] and [0027]-[0028]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified the compound of Cha ‘042 such that the compound of Takada was fully deuterated, based on the teaching of Li. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use materials that provide increased lifetime for the organic electroluminescent devices in which they’re used, based on the teachings of Li. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to maximize the number of C-D bonds in order to maximize the thermal stability of the compound to produce a fully deuterated compound, as taught by Li.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, and 12-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2017/0186969 A1) (hereafter “Kim ‘969”).
Regarding claims 1-3, 6-9, 12-22: Kim ‘969 discloses an organic electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a cathode, and organic layers intervening between the anode and the cathode {paragraphs [0463]-[0468]: Example 2}. The organic layers including a light emitting layer as well as a hole transporting zone between the anode and the light emitting layer {paragraphs [0463]-[0468]: Example 2}. The hole transporting zone comprising a hole injection layer having a thickness of 70 nm, a hole transporting layer having a thickness of 50 nm, and an emission auxiliary layer having a thickness of 70 nm {paragraphs [0463]-[0468]: Example 2}. The emission auxiliary layer is in contact with the light emitting layer {paragraphs [0463]-[0468]: Example 2}. The light emitting layer is a single layer {paragraphs [0463]-[0468]: Example 2}.
The emission auxiliary layer comprises the compound shown below {paragraph [0468] and Tables 1 and 2}.
PNG
media_image3.png
668
670
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The compound of Kim ‘969 shown above does not meet the limitations of the current formula (1), because the dibenzofuran is bonded through the position equivalent to the location of the instant R204 while the group equivalent to the instant L14 is phenylene.
However, Kim teaches that the compound of Kim ‘969 shown above has the structure of Formula 2-3 of Kim ‘969 {paragraphs [0013], [0050], and [0188]}.
PNG
media_image4.png
578
566
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Where X21 can be O and the bonding position at A24 is variable {paragraphs [0013], [0017], [0050], and [0054]}. Compounds E-109, E-110, E-188, E-189, E-214, and E-215 demonstrate that the phenylene linker bonding to the dibenzofuran at a position equivalent to the position of the instant R202 was envisioned by Kim ‘969 {pp. 76, 92, 96, and 97}.
Kim ‘969 teaches that devices using the compounds of the disclosure of Kim ‘969 as a material of an emission auxiliary layer have excellent efficiency and lifespan {paragraph [0475]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the compound of Kim ‘969 by bonding the dibenzofuran group as a position equivalent to that of the instant R202 rather than at a position equivalent to that of the instant R204, based on the teaching of Kim ‘969. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum combinations of substituent and substituent positions to be used to make compounds for use in an organic light-emitting device in order to produce optimal organic light emitting devices, which in this case means producing additional compounds having the structure of the compounds of Kim ‘969 that enable devices having excellent efficiency and lifespan, as taught by Kim ‘969.
In the resultant device, the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer; the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant second hole transporting layer; and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant third hole transporting layer. Each of the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969, the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with a hole transporting layer, because each must necessarily transport holes.
In this case instant first hole transporting layer and the instant second hole transporting layer has a thickness of 140 nm, as described above.
Alternatively, in the resultant device, the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer; the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant third hole transporting layer; and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant second hole transporting layer. Each of the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969, the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with a hole transporting layer, because each must necessarily transport holes. The emission auxiliary of Kim ‘969 —which is being equated with the instant second hole transporting layer—is in direct contact with the light emitting layer. Neither of claims 16 or 17 require any specific order of the layers being equated with the instant first hole transporting layer or the instant second hole transporting layer.
In this case instant first hole transporting layer and the instant second hole transporting layer has a thickness of 140 nm, as described above.
Regarding claim 3: Kim ‘969 teaches all of the features with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
Furthermore, the compound of Cha ‘042 shown above meets the limitations of claims 3-4 in the case where Ar1 is not represented by a group of the instant formula (1a) or (1f).
Regarding claim 24: Kim ‘969 teaches the compound shown below {(paragraphs [0013], [0050], and [0188]: The compounds of the disclosure of Kim ‘969 can have the structure of Formula 2-3 of Kim ‘969), (paragraph [0188]: The compounds having the structure of Formula 2-3 of Kim ‘969 are exemplified by the compounds on pp. 74-107.), (p. 81, Compound E-133, shown below)}.
PNG
media_image3.png
668
670
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kim ‘969 teaches that the compounds of the disclosure of Kim ‘969 are useful as the material of a emission auxiliary layer of an organic electroluminescent device that is located on the anode side of an organic electroluminescent device between the anode and the light-emitting layer {(paragraphs [0192]-[0202] and [0240]: The compounds having the structure of Formula 2-3 of Kim ‘969 are useful as materials of an emission auxiliary layer that is located on the anode side of an organic electroluminescent device between the anode and the light-emitting layer.), (paragraphs [0463]-[0468]: In particular, Example 2 uses the compound above in the emission auxiliary layer.)}.
Kim ‘969 teaches that devices using the compounds of the disclosure of Kim ‘969 as a material of an emission auxiliary layer have excellent efficiency and lifespan {paragraph [0475]}.
Kim ‘969 does not teach a specific device comprising the compound of Kim ‘969 shown above in addition to having a fluorescent dopant in the light-emitting layer.
However, Kim ‘969 teaches that the light emitting dopant of the emission layer can be a fluorescent dopant {paragraphs [0253]-[0254]}.
The device of Kim ‘969 can have the structure of an anode, a cathode, and organic layers intervening between the anode and the cathode {Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0192]-[0202]}. The organic layers including a light emitting layer as well as a hole transporting zone between the anode and the light emitting layer {Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0192]-[0202]}. The hole transporting zone comprising a hole injection layer, a hole transporting layer, and an emission auxiliary layer {Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0192]-[0202]}. The emission auxiliary layer is in contact with the light emitting layer {Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0192]-[0202]}. The light emitting layer is a single layer {Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0192]-[0202]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the compound of Kim ‘969 above such that it was used as the material of the hole transporting layer or electron blocking layer of the device of Kim ‘969 described above. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum combinations of materials to be used to make an organic light-emitting device in order to produce optimal organic light-emitting devices, which in this case means using other compounds of Kim ‘969 taught by Kim ‘969 to enable devices having lower driving voltage, improved efficiency, and enhanced service life.
In the resultant device, the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer; the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant second hole transporting layer; and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant third hole transporting layer. Each of the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969, the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with a hole transporting layer, because each must necessarily transport holes.
Alternatively, in the resultant device, the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant first hole transporting layer; the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant third hole transporting layer; and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with the instant second hole transporting layer. Each of the hole injection layer of Kim ‘969, the hole transporting layer of Kim ‘969 and the emission auxiliary layer of Kim ‘969 can be equated with a hole transporting layer, because each must necessarily transport holes. The emission auxiliary of Kim ‘969 —which is being equated with the instant second hole transporting layer—is in direct contact with the light emitting layer. Neither of claims 16 or 17 require any specific order of the layers being equated with the instant first hole transporting layer or the instant second hole transporting layer.
Regarding claim 25: Kim ‘969 teaches all of the features with respect to claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim ‘969 does not teach a specific electronic device comprising the organic electroluminescence device of Kim ‘969 described above.
However, Kim ‘969 teaches that the organic electroluminescence device of Kim ‘969 can be used in a display device {paragraph [0434]}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Kim ‘969 such that it was comprised in the display device of Kim ‘969, based on the teaching of Kim ‘969. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum combinations of materials to be used to make an organic light-emitting device in order to produce optimal display devices.
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2017/0186969 A1) (hereafter “Kim ‘969”) as applied to claim 14 above and evidenced by Yi et al. (“Blue Organic Light-Emitting Device Based on Dopant TBP”, 2011 Second International Conference on Digital Manufacturing & Automation, DOI: 10.1109/ICDMA.2011.72 (2011) pp. 271-273.) (hereafter “Yi”).
Regarding claim 23: Kim ‘969 teaches all of the features with respect to claim 14, as outlined above.
Kim ‘969 does not teach a specific device in which TBPe is the fluorescent dopant.
However, Kim ‘969 teaches that TBPe, shown below, can be the fluorescent dopant.
PNG
media_image5.png
534
482
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Yi provides evidence that TBPe exhibits fluorescence emission with a main peak wavelength less than 500 nm {p. 273, 1st col., 2nd and 3rd paragraphs}.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified the compound of Kim ‘969 by using TBPe as the fluorescent dopant of the light emitting layer, based on the teaching of Kim ‘969. The modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select suitable and optimum combinations of materials to be used to make an organic light-emitting device in order to produce optimal organic light-emitting devices.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DYLAN CLAY KERSHNER whose telephone number is (303)297-4257. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm (Mountain).
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.
/DYLAN C KERSHNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights