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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 which includes claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 01/07/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 27-36 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/07/2026.
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.
Claim 7 is 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.
Claim 7 depends on claim 6. Claim 6 recites “wherein the ETL is composed of the first ETL and the second ETL”. The limitation “composed of” has been interpreted as either "consisting of" or "consisting essentially of,", wherein the transitional phrase "consisting of" excludes any element, step, or ingredient not specified in the claim. (see MPEP §2111.03-IV).
However, claim 7 modifies the term “composed of” to “comprises”, which is open-ended transitional term and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. (e.g., “wherein the ETL comprises n thin film laminated layer units, each of the n film lamination layer units is composed of the first ETL and the second ETL”). This causes ambiguity in the scope of claim 7 as it contradicts the scope of claim 6. For examination purposes on the merits, claim 6 has been interpreted as one thin film laminated layer unit composed of the first ETL and the second ETL and thus claim 7 includes more than one thin film laminated layer units.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 20190288230 A1; hereinafter “Kim”).
In re claim 1, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, a quantum dot light-emitting diode (QLED) (10), comprising an anode (110) and a cathode (160) being oppositely arranged, a quantum dot luminescent layer (140) arranged between the anode (110) and cathode (160), and an electron transport layer (ETL) (150) arranged between the quantum dot luminescent layer (140) and the cathode (160);
wherein the ETL (150) comprises a first ETL, and the first ETL is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being greater than or equal to 0.6; or alternatively,
the ETL (150) contains zinc oxide (¶108), and a surface of at least some of the zinc oxide contains amino ligands and/or carboxyl ligands with 8-18 carbon atoms (¶113; “the organic polymer 152 may include, for example, at least one of an amino-containing polymer”).
In re claim 2, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, the QLED according to claim 1, wherein the ETL 150 is the first ETL, and the zinc oxide in the first ETL is a metal doped zinc oxide or an undoped zinc oxide (¶108).
In re claim 3, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, the QLED according to claim 1, wherein when the ETL 150 contains the zinc oxide, the ETL comprises the first ETL containing the zinc oxide, and the surface of the zinc oxide forming the first ETL contains the amino ligands (¶113) and/or the carboxyl ligands with 8-18 carbon atoms.
In re claim 4, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, the QLED according to claim 3, wherein the ETL 150 is the first ETL, and the zinc oxide forming the first ETL is an undoped zinc oxide (¶108) or a metal doped zinc oxide.
In re claim 5, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, the QLED according to claim 1,
wherein the ETL further comprises a second ETL arranged on a surface of one side of the first ETL adjacent to the cathode 160 (Kim discloses “an electron injection layer for easing the injection of electrons further disposed between the electron transport layer 150 and the second electrode 160” in ¶137. The electron injection layer has been interpreted as a second ETL) or the quantum dot luminescent layer, and
wherein the second ETL is a zinc oxide film or a metal doped zinc oxide with a surface hydroxyl content being less than or equal to 0.4 (The electron injection layer is n-type metal oxide, e.g., ZnO; ¶139. Therefore, the second ETL is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being zero, which reads on the claimed range of less than or equal to 0.4).
In re claim 8, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, the QLED according to claim 5, wherein the ETL further comprises a third ETL (Kim discloses “an electron injection layer for easing the injection of electrons and/or a hole blocking layer for blocking the movement of holes may be further disposed between the electron transport layer 150 and the second electrode 160.” in ¶137. The hole blocking layer has been interpreted as a third ETL).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki et al. (US 20230292540 A1; hereinafter “Iwasaki”) in view of Qin et al. (CN 110890470 A) (Qin et al. has been listed in the 06/30/2023 IDS).
In re claim 1, Iwasaki discloses in figs. 1-2, 6, a quantum dot light-emitting diode (QLED), comprising an anode and a cathode being oppositely arranged, a quantum dot luminescent layer 6 arranged between the anode 4 and cathode 8, and an electron transport layer (ETL) 7 arranged between the quantum dot luminescent layer 6 and the cathode 8 (¶85);
wherein the ETL comprises a first ETL, and the first ETL is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being greater than or equal to 0.6; or alternatively,
the ETL 7 contains zinc oxide, and a surface of at least some of the zinc oxide contains ligands (¶88).
Iwasaki does not expressly disclose the ligands are amino ligands and/or carboxyl ligands with 8-18 carbon atoms.
In the same field of endeavor, Qin discloses a quantum dot light-emitting diode (QLED), wherein the electron transport layer contains zinc oxide a surface of at least some of the zinc oxide contains amino ligands and/or carboxyl ligands with 8-18 carbon atoms (see page 8, 3rd paragraph, page 10, 5th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Qin into the electron transport layer of Iwasaki to increase the electron transporting property of the quantum dot, improves the transmission speed of carriers in the light emitting layer, and improve the luminous efficiency of the device, reduce working voltage, improve the service life of the device (page 2, 5th paragraph).
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki in view of Qin, as applied to claim 1 above and further in of Kim et al. (US 20190288230 A1; hereinafter “Kim”) (Kim et al. has been listed in the 06/30/2023 IDS).
In re claim 5, Iwasaki, as modified by Qin, discloses the QLED according to claim 1.
Iwasaki further discloses in figs. 1-2, 6, wherein the ETL 7 further comprises a second ETL 7b arranged on a surface of one side of the first ETL 7a adjacent to the cathode or the quantum dot luminescent layer 6 (¶88), and wherein the second ETL 7b is a zinc oxide film (¶88) or a metal doped zinc oxide.
Iwasaki further discloses a ligand coordinates with the zinc oxide film 7b (¶88), but does not expressly disclose the second ETL 7a is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being less than or equal to 0.4.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, a quantum dot light-emitting diode (QLED) (10),
wherein the ETL (150) comprises a first ETL, and the first ETL is zinc oxide (¶57, 108) with a surface hydroxyl content about 10 wt % to about 30% based on a total weight of the electron transport layer 150, so that the electron transport layer 150 may show excellent device characteristics and life-span characteristics (¶57, 113, 115).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the second ETL of Iwasaki as a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being less than or equal to 0.4 so that the electron transport layer 150 may show excellent device characteristics and life-span characteristics (¶57, 113, 115 of Kim).
In re claim 6, Iwasaki, as modified by Qin and Kim, discloses the QLED according to claim 5.
Iwasaki further discloses in figs. 1-2, 6, wherein the ETL is composed of the first ETL 7a and the second ETL 7b, and the second ETL 7b is more adjacent to the quantum dot luminescent layer 6 as compared to the first ETL 7a.
In re claim 7 (as best understood), Iwasaki, as modified by Qin and Kim, discloses the QLED according to claim 6.
Iwasaki does not expressly disclose in the embodiment relied upon in claim 5 (i.e., fig. 6), wherein the ETL comprises n thin film laminated layer units, each of the n film lamination layer units is composed of the first ETL and the second ETL, wherein n is greater than or equal to 2.
However, Iwasaki discloses in the embodiment shown fig. 10, wherein the ETL comprises n thin film laminated layer units (e.g., at least 2 thin film laminated layer units comprising 7c, 7a, 7b, 7d), each of the n film lamination layer units is composed of the first ETL (7c or 7b) and the second ETL (7a or 7d), wherein n is greater than or equal to 2 (119-121).
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 teachings of Iwasaki and arrive at the claimed invention to prevent electron transport from the cathode to the light-emitting layer more effectively (¶124 of Iwasaki).
Claim(s) 5, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki in view of Qin, as applied to claim 1 above and further in of Kim.
In re claim 5, Iwasaki, as modified by Qin, discloses the QLED according to claim 1.
Iwasaki further discloses in figs. 8-9, wherein the ETL 7 further comprises a second ETL 7a arranged on a surface of one side of the first ETL 7c adjacent to the cathode or the quantum dot luminescent layer 8 (¶104), and wherein the second ETL 7a is a zinc oxide film or a metal doped zinc oxide (¶111).
Iwasaki further discloses a ligand coordinates with the zinc oxide film 7b (¶113), but does not expressly disclose the second ETL 7a is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being less than or equal to 0.4.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, a quantum dot light-emitting diode (QLED) (10),
wherein the ETL (150) comprises a first ETL, and the first ETL is zinc oxide (¶57, 108) with a surface hydroxyl content about 10 wt % to about 30% based on a total weight of the electron transport layer 150, so that the electron transport layer 150 may show excellent device characteristics and life-span characteristics (¶57, 113, 115).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the second ETL of Iwasaki as a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being less than or equal to 0.4 so that the electron transport layer 150 may show excellent device characteristics and life-span characteristics (¶57, 113, 115 of Kim).
In re claim 8, Iwasaki, as modified by Qin and Kim, discloses the QLED according to claim 5 outlined above.
Iwasaki further discloses in figs. 8-9, wherein the ETL 7 further comprises a third ETL 7b (¶111).
In re claim 9, Iwasaki, as modified by Qin and Kim, discloses the QLED according to claim 8 outlined above.
Iwasaki further discloses in figs. 8-9, wherein the third ETL 7b is a zinc oxide film (¶111) and a ligand coordinates with the zinc oxide film 7b (¶113) but does not expressly disclose the third ETL 7b is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content being greater than or equal to 0.6.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches in figs. 1-2, a quantum dot light-emitting diode (QLED) (10),
wherein the ETL (150) comprises a first ETL, and the first ETL is zinc oxide (¶57, 108) with a surface hydroxyl content about 10 wt % to about 30% based on a total weight of the electron transport layer 150, so that the electron transport layer 150 may show excellent device characteristics and life-span characteristics (¶57, 113, 115).
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 teachings of Kim to form an electron transport layer which is zinc oxide with a surface hydroxyl content being greater than or equal to 0.6 in Iwasaki so that the electron transport layer 150 may show excellent device characteristics and life-span characteristics (¶57, 113, 115 of Kim).
MPEP §2144.05-I states a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%).
Referring to MPEP § 2144.05, “…the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results over the prior art range.” (See also MPEP § 716.02 for a discussion of criticality and unexpected results.)
In re claim 10, Iwasaki, as modified by Qin and Kim, discloses the QLED according to claim 9 outlined above.
Iwasaki further discloses in figs. 8-9, wherein the third ETL 7b is arranged on a surface of a side of the second ETL 7a away from the first ETL 7c, the second ETL is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content less than or equal to 0.4 (as explained above in claim 5, Iwasaki as modified by Kim discloses the second ETL is a zinc oxide film with a surface hydroxyl content less than or equal to 0.4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NILUFA RAHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-8926. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm EST.
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, Yara J. Green can be reached at (571) 270-3035. 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.
/NILUFA RAHIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893