DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to U.S. Patent Application No. 18/270,597 filed on 30 June 2023.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant' s Information Disclosure Statement(s) (IDS). The IDS(es) has/have been considered.
Priority
The application’s status as a 371 of PCT/CN2021/141742 is acknowledged.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Group 1 Species 1 embodiment in the reply filed on 24 February 2025 is acknowledged.
Regarding Applicant’s listing of claims 1-11, 13-15, and 17-20 as readable on the elected invention/species, however, the Examiner respectfully notes that claim 18 does not belong to the elected Group 1 Species I embodiment. Claim 18 recites the limitation “wherein when the shell layer of the quantum dot material is made of the ZnSeS, a wavelength of irradiating by the ultraviolet light is 250-375 nm, and the light wave density is 30-150 mJ/cm2.” Applicant’s elected Group 1/Species I embodiment is disclosed as drawn to a method wherein “the quantum dot material is made of ZnSe,” but not wherein the shell layer of the quantum dot material is made of the ZnSeS.
Accordingly, claims 12, 16, and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed features:
Of claim 4: “irradiating by the ultraviolet light from a side of the electron transport layer”;
Of claim 15: “a step of preparing a hole injection layer and a hole transport layer between the anode and the quantum dot light-emitting layer”;
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-11, 13-15, and 17, 19, and 20 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.
“The essential inquiry pertaining to this requirement is whether the claims set out and circumscribe a particular subject matter with a reasonable degree of clarity and particularity. ‘As the statutory language of “particular[ity]” and “distinct[ness]” indicates, claims are required to be cast in clear—as opposed to ambiguous, vague, indefinite—terms. It is the claims that notify the public of what is within the protections of the patent, and what is not.' ” MPEP § 2173.02(II) (quoting In re Packard, 751 F.3d 1307, 1313, 110 USPQ2d 1785, 1788 (Fed. Cir. 2014)).
Regarding claim 1: Claim 1 states, in relevant part: “a laminated composite structure of a quantum dot light-emitting layer and an electron transport layer between an anode and a cathode . . . .” This phrase renders the scope of the claim unclear because of Applicant’s chosen (potentially conflicting) terminology, and because it is susceptible to more than one plausible construction.
First, the terms “laminated” and “composite” themselves have potentially conflicting definitions when used to describe the method of preparing the structure claimed by Applicant. The term “laminated,” used as an adjective, may be defined as “manufactured by bonding layers of material together.” The term “composite,” used as a noun, means “a thing made up of several parts or elements,” typically within a single constructional material (synonyms include “alloy,” “blend,” “mixture,” “amalgam,” “fusion,” etc.). Thus, it is unclear whether the structure of “a quantum dot light-emitting layer and an electron transport layer” is a laminate structure of individual layers, a composite layer, or either. For the purposes of examination, the phrase has been interpreted as either.
Second, it is unclear whether the term “laminated composite” refers to either (1) a structure including each of a quantum dot light-emitting layer, an electron transport layer, an anode, and a cathode, or (2) a structure including only a quantum dot light-emitting layer and an electron transport layer. For the purposes of examination, the relevant terminology has been interpreted consistent with interpretation (2).
Further, regarding claim 1: claim 1 states, in relevant part: “the laminated composite structure is irradiated by an ultraviolet light.” This phrase renders the scope of the claim unclear because it is susceptible to more than one plausible construction and because it clearly conflicts with numerous portions of Applicant’s specification.
First, Applicant’s chosen phrasing conflicts with numerous portions of the specification that clearly describe the only step of irradiating as that which occurs before the laminated composite structure is formed. Additional to describing the step of irradiating as occurring on a “laminated composite,” Applicant describes the step of irradiating as occurring either on a “composite structure,” or only the electron transport layer and as resulting in a “laminated composite structure.” See, e.g., [0044]: “transferring a laminated composite film of the quantum dot light-emitting layer and the electron transport layer to a substrate prepared with a cathode after the composite film of the quantum dot light-emitting layer and electron transport layer is irradiated by ultraviolet light”; [0045]: “depositing to prepare a quantum dot light-emitting layer on a side surface of the hole transport layer; preparing an electron transport layer on a surface of the quantum dot light-emitting layer away from the hole transport layer, irradiating the electron transport layer by an ultraviolet light to obtain a laminated composite structure of the quantum dot light-emitting layer and the electron transport layer”; [0049]-[0051]: “S30; depositing a quantum dot light-emitting layer onto the hole transport layer; S40; depositing an electron transport layer onto the quantum dot light-emitting layer; S50; irradiating the electron transport layer by an ultraviolet light”; [0057]: “In the embodiment, in step S50, when the H2O content is less than 1 ppm and the temperature is 80-120° C., the electron transport layer is irradiated vertically for 10~60 min by ultraviolet light with wavelength of 250~420 nm and light wave density of 10~300 mJ/cm2.” Accordingly, it is unclear at what point irradiation occurs, as well as on which structures irradiation is performed.
Second, it is unclear whether the phrase “the laminated composite structure is irradiated by an ultraviolet light” refers to either (1) a second step of irradiating the laminated composite structure after a step of irradiating a composite structure, or (2) a step of irradiating a composite structure (which, after irradiation, forms the laminated composite structure). For the purposes of examination, the relevant terminology has been interpreted consistent with interpretation (2) in claim 1, as well as in any claim in which irradiation of the laminated composite is expressly described, including claims 3, 4, 5, 10, 14, 17, 19, and 20
Claims 2-11, 13-15, and 17, 19, and 20, which depend from claim 1, are rejected under § 112(b) for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 19: each of claims 3, 10, and 19 contain the character “~”. It is unclear what the character “~” denotes. For the purposes of examination, the character “~” has been interpreted to mean the character “-” everywhere it appears.
Claims 4-11, 13-15, 17, and 20, which depend from claim 3, are rejected under § 112(b) for the same reasons as claim 3.
Regarding claim 8: claim 8 states, in relevant part: “the metal transport material . . . .” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims, or present a sufficient showing that the claims comply with the statutory requirements.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
In the instant case, claim 3 recites “irradiating the laminated composite structure for 10 to 60 minutes . . . .” “A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.” MPEP § 608.01(n)(III). Thus, claim 20, which depends from claim 3 and recites “a duration of irradiating by the ultraviolet light is 30 minutes to 90 minutes” (i.e., excluding part of the claimed range of claim 3 and extending the claimed range beyond the range specified by claim 3) is not a proper dependent claim, even though it places further limitations on the remaining elements or adds further elements.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-11, 14, 15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0408417 (filed June 24, 2020) (hereinafter “Angioni”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Angioni discloses: A method for preparing a light-emitting device, comprising a following step:
preparing a laminated composite structure of a quantum dot light-emitting layer and an electron transport layer (FIG. 3, combined charge transport layer and emissive layer (CCTEL) 307, wherein the charge transport layer material may be an electron transport material, [0074]-[0077]) between an anode (FIG. 3, either of first electrode 302 or second electrode 304, which may be either an anode or a cathode, [0076]) and a cathode (FIG. 3, either of first electrode 302 or second electrode 304, which may be either an anode or a cathode, [0076]);
wherein the electron transport layer comprises a metal oxide transport material (FIG. 3, [0077]: “In exemplary embodiments, the electron transport and/or electron injection layers may include individual or combinations of: ZnO, 8-quinolinolato lithium (Liq.), LiF, Cs2CO3, MgxZn1−xO, AlxZn1−xO, GaxZn1−xO, 2,2′,2″-(1,3,5-benzinetriyl)-tris(1-phenyl-1-H-benzimidazole) (TPBi), TiO2, ZrO2, N4,N4′-Di(naphthalen-1-yl)-N4,N4′-bis(4-vinylphenyl)biphenyl-4,4′-diamine (VNPB), 9,9-Bis[4-[(4-ethenylphenyl)methoxy]phenyl]-N2,N7-di-1-naphthalenyl-N2,N7-diphenyl-9H-Fluorene-2,7-diamine (VB-FNPD), where 0≤x≤1.”); and
the laminated composite structure is irradiated by an ultraviolet light (FIG. 3, [0082]: “Additionally or alternatively, the quantum dots may be segregated within the crosslinked material at least in part in response to the activation stimulus, such as in response to exposure to UV light.”).
Regarding claim 2, Angioni further discloses wherein the quantum dot light-emitting layer comprises a quantum dot material with a core-shell structure (FIG. 3, [0053]: “It will be appreciated that while the present disclosure primarily describes the QDs as core-shell QDs, in some embodiments the QDs may not be of the core-shell type or they may be of a core/multiple-shells type having more than one shell. The non-core-shell type QDs may be made from one or more of the above-mentioned materials, and the QDs in accordance with the present disclosure may not include a core-shell configuration.”), and
a shell layer of the quantum dot material contains a zinc element (FIG. 3, [0077]: “The EML may include: QD nanoparticles which include one or more of: InP, CdSe, CdS, CdSexS1−x, CdTe, CdxZn1−xSe, CdxZn1−xSeyS1−y, ZnSe, ZnS, ZnSTe, ZnSeTe, perovskites of the form ABX3, ZnwCuzIn1−(w+z)S, carbon, where O≤w, x, y, z≤1 and (w+z)≤1.”).
Regarding claim 3, Angioni further discloses wherein the step of irradiating by the ultraviolet light comprises: irradiating the laminated composite structure for 10 to 60 minutes (FIG. 3, [0140]: “For example, UV exposure time may range from 0.001 seconds to 15 minutes . . . .”) under conditions of an ultraviolet light wavelength of 250~420 nm (FIG. 3, [0140]: “The morphology of the emissive material may in some embodiments be controlled using one or more of UV exposure times, UV-intensity, amount of photo initiator, a ratio between QDs and cross-linkable material, concentration of the ligands of the QDs total concentration of the mixture, type and thickness of the deposition surface, and the like.”) and a light wave density of 10~300 mJ/cm2 (FIG. 3, [0140]: “UV exposure intensity may range from 0.001 to 100,000 mJ/cm2.”; [0141]: “In an exemplary embodiment, the UV exposure intensity ranges from 0.01 to 100 mJ/cm2”).
Regarding claim 4, Angioni further discloses wherein the step of irradiating by the ultraviolet light comprises: irradiating by the ultraviolet light from a side of the electron transport layer (FIGS. 12A-E, depicting wherein the CCTEL is formed by irradiation from a side of the electron transport layer).
Regarding claim 6, Angioni further discloses wherein the metal oxide transport material is at least one selected from the group consisting of ZnO, TiO2, Fe2O3, SnO2, and Ta2O3 (FIG. 3, [0077]: “In exemplary embodiments, the electron transport and/or electron injection layers may include individual or combinations of: ZnO, 8-quinolinolato lithium (Liq.), LiF, Cs2CO3, MgxZn1−xO, AlxZn1−xO, GaxZn1−xO, 2,2′,2″-(1,3,5-benzinetriyl)-tris(1-phenyl-1-H-benzimidazole) (TPBi), TiO2, ZrO2, N4,N4′-Di(naphthalen-1-yl)-N4,N4′-bis(4-vinylphenyl)biphenyl-4,4′-diamine (VNPB), 9,9-Bis[4-[(4-ethenylphenyl)methoxy]phenyl]-N2,N7-di-1-naphthalenyl-N2,N7-diphenyl-9H-Fluorene-2,7-diamine (VB-FNPD), where 0≤x≤1.”).
Regarding claim 7, Angioni further discloses wherein the metal oxide transport material is at least one selected from the group consisting of ZnO, TiO2, Fe2O3, SnO2, and Ta2O3 doped with a metal element, and the metal element is at least one selected from the group consisting of aluminum, magnesium, lithium, lanthanum, yttrium, manganese, gallium, iron, chromium, and cobalt (FIG. 3, [0077]: “In exemplary embodiments, the electron transport and/or electron injection layers may include individual or combinations of: ZnO, 8-quinolinolato lithium (Liq.), LiF, Cs2CO3, MgxZn1−xO, AlxZn1−xO, GaxZn1−xO, 2,2′,2″-(1,3,5-benzinetriyl)-tris(1-phenyl-1-H-benzimidazole) (TPBi), TiO2, ZrO2, N4,N4′-Di(naphthalen-1-yl)-N4,N4′-bis(4-vinylphenyl)biphenyl-4,4′-diamine (VNPB), 9,9-Bis[4-[(4-ethenylphenyl)methoxy]phenyl]-N2,N7-di-1-naphthalenyl-N2,N7-diphenyl-9H-Fluorene-2,7-diamine (VB-FNPD), where 0≤x≤1.”).
Regarding claim 9, Angioni further discloses wherein the shell layer of the quantum dot material comprises an alloy material formed by at least one or at least two selected from the group consisting of ZnS, ZnSe, ZnTe, CdZnS and ZnCdSe (FIG. 3, [0077]: “The EML may include: QD nanoparticles which include one or more of: InP, CdSe, CdS, CdSexS1−x, CdTe, CdxZn1−xSe, CdxZn1−xSeyS1−y, ZnSe, ZnS, ZnSTe, ZnSeTe, perovskites of the form ABX3, ZnwCuzIn1−(w+z)S, carbon, where O≤w, x, y, z≤1 and (w+z)≤1.”).
Regarding claim 10, Angioni further discloses wherein when the shell layer of the quantum dot material is made of the ZnS (FIG. 3, [0077]: “The EML may include: QD nanoparticles which include one or more of: InP, CdSe, CdS, CdSexS1−x, CdTe, CdxZn1−xSe, CdxZn1−xSeyS1−y, ZnSe, ZnS, ZnSTe, ZnSeTe, perovskites of the form ABX3, ZnwCuzIn1−(w+z)S, carbon, where O≤w, x, y, z≤1 and (w+z)≤1.”), a wavelength of irradiating by the ultraviolet light is 250-355 nm (FIG. 3, [0140]: “The morphology of the emissive material may in some embodiments be controlled using one or more of UV exposure times, UV-intensity, amount of photo initiator, a ratio between QDs and cross-linkable material, concentration of the ligands of the QDs total concentration of the mixture, type and thickness of the deposition surface, and the like.”), and the light wave density is 50˜150 mJ/cm2 (FIG. 3, [0140]: “UV exposure intensity may range from 0.001 to 100,000 mJ/cm2.”; [0141]: “In an exemplary embodiment, the UV exposure intensity ranges from 0.01 to 100 mJ/cm2”).
Regarding claim 11, Angioni further discloses wherein a thickness of the electron transport layer is 10-200 nm (FIGS. 3/5, deposition surface 502, [0096]: “The deposition surface 502 can be the surface of . . . the ETL/EIL . . . . ”; [0140]: “The thickness of the deposition surface may range from 0.1 to 100 nm.”).
Regarding claim 14, Angioni further discloses wherein when the thickness of the electron transport layer is less than 80 nm (FIGS. 3/5, deposition surface 502, [0096]: “The deposition surface 502 can be the surface of . . . the ETL/EIL . . . . ”; [0140]: “The thickness of the deposition surface may range from 0.1 to 100 nm.”), a duration of irradiating by the ultraviolet light is 15 minutes to 45 minutes (FIGS. 3/5, [0140]: “For example, UV exposure time may range from 0.001 seconds to 15 minutes, and/or UV exposure intensity may range from 0.001 to 100,000 mJ/cm2.”).
Regarding claim 15, Angioni further discloses a step of preparing a hole injection layer and a hole transport layer (FIGS. 3/5, disclosing wherein the hole transport layer may include a hole transport layer and hole injection layer, and depicting wherein the hole transport layer may be plural, [0145]: “The hole transport and/or hole injection layers may include individual or combinations of: poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene):poly(styrenesulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS), poly(9,9-dioctylfluorene-co-N-(4-sec-butylphenyl)-diphenylamine) (TFB), poly(9-vinylcarbazole) (PVK), poly(N,N′-bis(4-butylphenyl)-N,N′-bisphenylbenzidine) (PolyTPD), V2O5, NiO, CuO, WO3, MoO3, 2,3,5,6-tetrafluoro-7,7,8,8-tetracyanoquinodimethane (F4TCNQ), 1,4,5,8,9,11-hexaazatriphenylenehexacarbonitrile (HATCN), N4,N4′-Bis(4-(6-((3-ethyloxetan-3-yl)methoxy)hexyl)phenyl)-N4,N4′-diphenylbiphenyl-4,4′-diamine (OTPD), N4,N4′-Bis(4-(6-((3-ethyloxetan-3-yl)methoxy)hexyloxy)phenyl)-N4,N4′-bis(4-methoxyphenyl)biphenyl-4,4′-diamine (QUPD), N,N′-(4,4′-(Cyclohexane-1,1-diyl)bis(4,1-phenylene))bis(N-(4-(6-(2-ethyloxetan-2-yloxy)hexyl)phenyl)-3,4,5-trifluoroaniline) (X-F6-TAPC), 3,5-di-9H-carbazol-9-yl-N,N-bis[4-[[6-[(3-ethyl-3-oxetanyl)methoxy]hexyl]oxy]phenyl]-benzenamine (Oxe-DCDPA).”) between the anode and the quantum dot light-emitting layer (FIGS. 3/5, depicting wherein the hole transport and hole injection layers may be between the electrode 302/304 acting as an anode and the CCTEL 307).
Regarding claim 17, Angioni further discloses wherein when the shell layer of the quantum dot material is made of the ZnSe (FIG. 3, [0077]: “The EML may include: QD nanoparticles which include one or more of: InP, CdSe, CdS, CdSexS1−x, CdTe, CdxZn1−xSe, CdxZn1−xSeyS1−y, ZnSe, ZnS, ZnSTe, ZnSeTe, perovskites of the form ABX3, ZnwCuzIn1−(w+z)S, carbon, where O≤w, x, y, z≤1 and (w+z)≤1.”), a wavelength of irradiating by the ultraviolet light is 280-375 nm (FIG. 3, [0140]: “The morphology of the emissive material may in some embodiments be controlled using one or more of UV exposure times, UV-intensity, amount of photo initiator, a ratio between QDs and cross-linkable material, concentration of the ligands of the QDs total concentration of the mixture, type and thickness of the deposition surface, and the like.”), and the light wave density is 30-120 mJ/cm2 (FIG. 3, [0140]: “UV exposure intensity may range from 0.001 to 100,000 mJ/cm2.”; [0141]: “In an exemplary embodiment, the UV exposure intensity ranges from 0.01 to 100 mJ/cm2”).
Regarding claim 19, Angioni further discloses wherein the step of irradiating by the ultraviolet light comprises: irradiating the laminated composite structure for 10 to 60 minutes (FIG. 3, [0140]: “For example, UV exposure time may range from 0.001 seconds to 15 minutes . . . .”) under conditions of an ultraviolet light wavelength of 250~420 nm (FIG. 3, [0140]: “The morphology of the emissive material may in some embodiments be controlled using one or more of UV exposure times, UV-intensity, amount of photo initiator, a ratio between QDs and cross-linkable material, concentration of the ligands of the QDs total concentration of the mixture, type and thickness of the deposition surface, and the like.”) and a light wave density of 10~300 mJ/cm2 (FIG. 3, [0140]: “UV exposure intensity may range from 0.001 to 100,000 mJ/cm2.”; [0141]: “In an exemplary embodiment, the UV exposure intensity ranges from 0.01 to 100 mJ/cm2”).
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Angioni.
Regarding claim 20, Angioni discloses wherein the thickness of the electron transport layer is higher than 80 nm (FIGS. 3/5, deposition surface 502, [0096]: “The deposition surface 502 can be the surface of . . . the ETL/EIL . . . . ”; [0140]: “The thickness of the deposition surface may range from 0.1 to 100 nm.”). Angioni does not specifically disclose wherein a duration of irradiating by the ultraviolet light is 30 minutes to 90 minutes.
In [0140], however, Angioni states: “The morphology of the emissive material may in some embodiments be controlled using one or more of UV exposure times, UV-intensity, amount of photo initiator, a ratio between QDs and cross-linkable material, concentration of the ligands of the QDs total concentration of the mixture, type and thickness of the deposition surface, and the like. For example, UV exposure time may range from 0.001 seconds to 15 minutes, and/or UV exposure intensity may range from 0.001 to 100,000 mJ/cm2. The amount of photo initiator may range from 0.001 to 15 wt % of the total concentration of the QDs and the cross-linkable material in the mixture. The ratio between QDs and cross-linkable material may range from 0.001 to 1, and the total concentration of the QDs and the cross-linkable material in the mixture may range from 0.1 to 20 wt %. The concentration of the ligands of the QDs may range from 10 to 45 wt % of the overall weight of the QD including the core-shell structure and ligands. Concentration may also be referred to as “content” or “amount”. The thickness of the deposition surface may range from 0.1 to 100 nm.” Thus, the UV exposure time is a result-effective variable for optimizing the morphology of the emissive material, and thus the light emitting properties of the device.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the UV exposure time, identified by Angioni as a result-effective variable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a UV exposure time ranging from 30 to 90 minutes in order to achieve a desired emissive material morphology disclosed in Angioni in [0140]. See MPEP § 2144.05 (“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”) (quoting In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Angioni in view of Chinese Patent Publication No. CN112018270A (published Dec. 1, 2020) (hereinafter “Nie”).
Regarding claim 5, Angioni discloses wherein conditions of irradiating by the ultraviolet light comprise a temperature being 80-120° C (FIG. 3, [0138]: “The annealing may be performed at any suitable temperature that effectuates evaporation of the solvent while also maintaining the integrity of the quantum dots and charge transport material. In exemplary embodiments, annealing may be performed at a temperature ranging from 5° C. to 150° C., or at a temperature ranging from 30° C. to 150° C., or at a temperature ranging from 30° C. to 100° C.”; [0139]: “As another example, application of UV light as shown in FIGS. 12D1/12D2 and annealing (e.g., heating) may be performed in parallel.”). Angioni does not specifically disclose wherein conditions of irradiating by the ultraviolet light comprise: under an environment of a H2O content being less than 1 ppm.
In the same field of endeavor, Nie discloses a method for preparing a quantum dot light-emitting diode, the method comprising a step of carrying out the process under an environment of a H2O content being less than 1 ppm (“The substrate of the initial quantum dot film was treated under 365nm UV under argon atmosphere for 10 minutes . . . .” Translation of CN112018270A at 7). Regarding the argon atmosphere Nie further states: “In the method for preparing the quantum dot film provided by the embodiment of the present invention, ultraviolet light treatment can break the binding force between the first ligand and the quantum dot on the surface of the initial quantum film exposed to ultraviolet, so as to facilitate the solvent cleaning Ligand; specifically, the time of the ultraviolet light treatment is 1-60 min; the temperature of the ultraviolet light treatment is 50-150°C, preferably the temperature temperature is 80-120°C. In the above temperature and time range, the first ligand on the surface of the initial quantum film exposed to ultraviolet can be better shed.” Translation of CN112018270A at 4.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed method of Angioni with the step of irradiating the substrate with UV light in an inert Ar atmosphere in order to facilitate solvent cleaning of the substrate. See Translation of CN112018270A at 4.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Angioni in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0393130 (filed Sept. 26, 2019) (hereinafter “Iwata”).
Regarding claim 8, Angioni does not specifically disclose wherein a particle size of the metal transport material is less than or equal to 10 nm.
In the same field of endeavor, Iwata discloses forming a quantum dot light-emitting diode, wherein a particle size of the n-type semiconductor particles, which may be metal oxide materials (FIG. 1, [0039]: “Note that, in the present embodiment, a case where inorganic nanoparticles consisting of, for example, zinc oxide (for example, ZnO) which are electron-transporting inorganic nanoparticles, are used as the n-type semiconductor particles 36 is described as an example. However, the disclosure is not limited thereto, and any one of, for example, inorganic nanoparticles consisting of titanium oxide (for example, TiO2), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of indium oxide (for example, In2O3), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of gallium oxide (for example, Ga2O3), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of tin oxide (for example, SnO2), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of zinc sulfide (for example, ZnS), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of zinc telluride (for example, ZnTe), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of vanadium oxide (for example, V2O5), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of molybdenum oxide (for example, Mo0 3), inorganic nanoparticles consisting of tungsten oxide (for example, WO3), and inorganic nanoparticles consisting of gallium nitride (for example, GaN) may be used as long as the inorganic nanoparticles are electron-transporting inorganic nanoparticles.”), have a particle size that is less than or equal to 10 nm (FIG. 1, [0040]: “Note that, although the particle size of the n-type semiconductor particles 36 in the electron transport layer 33 is not particularly limited, the particle size is preferably equal to or greater than 1 nm”). Regarding the particle size, in [0040], Iwata states: “Note that, although the particle size of the n-type semiconductor particles 36 in the electron transport layer 33 is not particularly limited, the particle size is preferably equal to or greater than 1 nm from the viewpoint of suppressing aggregation of particles, and the particle size is preferably equal to or less than 30 nm from the viewpoint of reducing the surface roughness of the electron transport layer 33 and the surface roughness of the electroluminescent element XR.” Thus, particle size is a result-effective variable for optimizing suppression of aggregation of particles and surface roughness.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the particle size of the metal oxide transport material, identified by Iwata as a result-effective variable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a particle size less than or equal to 10 nm in order to achieve a desired balance surface roughness and suppression of aggregation of particles as disclosed in Iwata in [0040]. See MPEP § 2144.05 (“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”) (quoting In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Angioni in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0383178 (filed Dec. 9, 2020) (hereinafter “Feng”).
Regarding claim 13, Angioni does not specifically disclose wherein a thickness of the shell layer of the quantum dot material is 0.2-6.0 nm.
In the same field of endeavor, Feng discloses forming a quantum dot light-emitting diode, wherein a thickness of the outermost shell is 1 nm to 100 nm (FIG. 1, [0013]: “Optionally, in the above quantum dot provided by an embodiment of the present disclosure, a thickness of the outermost shell is 1 nm to 100 nm.”). Regarding the thickness of the shell, in [0053], Feng states: “Since the electrons and the holes are injected into the core structure of the quantum dot respectively from a cathode and an anode through the outermost shell and the inner shell, a thickness of the inner shell may affect injection of the electrons and the holes. If the inner shell is too thick, injection of the electrons and the holes is weakened. Therefore, in order to ensure the light-emitting efficiency of the quantum dot, the electron transport capability of the electron transport material, and the hole transport capability of the hole transport material, in the above quantum dot provided in an embodiment of the present disclosure, the thickness of the inner shell may be 1 nm to 10 nm, and a thickness of the outermost shell may be 1 nm to 100 nm.” Thus, shell thickness is a result-effective variable for optimizing injection of electrons and holes.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the shell thickness, identified by Feng as a result-effective variable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a shell thickness ranging between 0.2-6.0 nm in order to achieve a desired injection of electrons and holes. See MPEP § 2144.05 (“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”) (quoting In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D WEILAND whose telephone number is (703)756-4760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Steven Gauthier can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/ADAM D WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813