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 .
Response to Amendment
In the response filed 07/22/2026, the claims were amended.
These amendments are hereby entered.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the objection to claims 1 and 16-18 are withdrawn by the Office.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claims 1-18 as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 of claims 1, 3-4, and 8 as being anticipated by Lee et al. (KR 1020200842 B1), and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 1-2, 5-9, 15, and 17-18 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (CN 110128424 A), claim 10 as being unpatentable over Zhang as applied above and further in view of Yoo et al. (US 2016/0043327 A1), claim 11 as being unpatentable over Zhang and Yoo as applied above, and further in view of Kambe et al. (US 2015/0303380 A1), and claim 16 as being unpatentable over Zhang as applied above and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (WO 2015/102118 A1) are withdrawn by the Office.
Claims 1-18 were originally filed.
Claim 2 is canceled.
Claims 1 and 16-18 are instantly amended.
Claims 1 and 3-18 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
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.
Claims 1, 3-10, 12-14, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 2016/0043327 A1).
With respect to claims 1 and 5, Yoo discloses a material for a charge generation or electron transport layer (abstract), represented by Chemical Formula 1 (paragraph 0074), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
194
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chemical Formula 1 represents Compound NC190 (Table 1, page 33), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image2.png
358
689
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In this Chemical Formula 1, Yoo also teaches that L3 is a single bond (paragraph 0077, lines 1-2).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of instant general formula (1) when each of X3 is a nitrogen atom, and each X1 and X2 is a methine group, L1 is a phenylene group, L2 is an anthrylene group, n is 0 and A is absent.
Yoo includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Yoo being a lack of the aforementioned linking group being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known linking group from the finite list of possible linking groups to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which has high electron mobility by having two nitrogen atoms to make the compound electron-rich, which may also facilitate transfer of electrons from the N-type charge generation layer to the electron transport layer, increasing lifetime of a device comprising the compound (paragraph 0079), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claims 3 and 4, Yoo teaches the material of claim 1, as discussed above.
Yoo also teaches that the phenanthroline group at Ar1 may be substituted with Ar3 (see Chemical Formula 1 above), and that examples of Ar3 include a phenyl group (paragraph 0076, lines 1-2).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when n is 1 and A is a phenyl group.
Yoo includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Yoo being a lack of the aforementioned substituent being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from the finite list of possible substituents to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which has high electron mobility by having two nitrogen atoms to make the compound electron-rich, which may also facilitate transfer of electrons from the N-type charge generation layer to the electron transport layer, increasing lifetime of a device comprising the compound (paragraph 0079), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 6, Yoo teaches the material of claim 1, and Yoo also teaches that L1 may be a naphthylene group (paragraph 0077, lines 1-3).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim wherein L1 is a naphthylene group.
Yoo includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Yoo being a lack of the aforementioned linking group being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known linking group from the finite list of possible linking groups to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which has high electron mobility by having two nitrogen atoms to make the compound electron-rich, which may also facilitate transfer of electrons from the N-type charge generation layer to the electron transport layer, increasing lifetime of a device comprising the compound (paragraph 0079), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 7, Yoo teaches the material of claim 1, and Yoo also teaches that Yoo also teaches that L3 is a single bond (paragraph 0077, lines 1-2).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when L1 is an anthrylene group and L2 is a single bond.
Yoo includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Yoo being a lack of the aforementioned linking group being explicitly stated. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known linking group from the finite list of possible linking groups to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of a compound which has high electron mobility by having two nitrogen atoms to make the compound electron-rich, which may also facilitate transfer of electrons from the N-type charge generation layer to the electron transport layer, increasing lifetime of a device comprising the compound (paragraph 0079), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claim 8, Yoo teaches the material of claim 1, and Yoo also teaches an organic light-emitting display device comprising an anode, a cathode (paragraph 0059 and FIG. 1), an electron transporting layer (paragraph 0062), and a light emitting layer (paragraph 0062), and Yoo also teaches that the compound may be used in the electron transport layer (paragraph 0104).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound as a material in the electron transport layer of an organic light emitting device with the claimed device structure, as taught by Yoo.
With respect to claim 9, Yoo teaches the organic EL element of claim 8, and Yoo also teaches that the material facilitates the transfer of alkali metal compounds from the charge generation layer to the electron transport layer (paragraphs 0102 and 0115)
For this reason, Examiner is interpreting the electron transport layer as comprising an alkali metal complex compound.
With respect to claim 10, Yoo teaches the material of claim 1, and Yoo also teaches an organic light-emitting display device comprising an anode, a cathode (paragraph 0059 and FIG. 1), an electron transporting layer (paragraph 0062), and a light emitting layer (paragraph 0062), and Yoo also teaches that the compound may be used in the charge generation layer (abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound in the charge generation layer of an organic light emitting device with the claimed structure, as taught by Yoo.
With respect to claims 12-14, Yoo teaches the organic EL element of claim 10, and Yoo also teaches that the charge generation layer includes a dopant, such as an alkali metal, specifically, lithium or ytterbium (paragraph 0169)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an alkali metal dopant such as lithium or ytterbium in the charge generation layer, as taught by Yoo.
With respect to claims 17 and 18, Yoo teaches the organic EL element of claim 8, and Yoo also teaches the described compound may be used in an organic light-emitting display device (paragraph 0014).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the organic EL element in an illumination device, such as a light-emitting display device, as taught by Yoo.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Yoo et al. (US 2016/0043327 A1)as applied above, and further in view of Kambe et al. (US 2015/0303380 A1).
With respect to claim 11, Yoo teaches the organic light-emitting element of claim 10, as discussed above.
However, Yoo does not teach nor fairly suggest that the charge generation layer further comprises a phenanthroline dimer.
In analogous art, Kambe teaches an organic electroluminescence device including an anode, a cathode, and two or more emitting units that are separated by a charge-generation layer and the charge-generation layer comprises a phenanthroline dimer (abstract and Formula I).
Kambe gives a preferred embodiment of the phenanthroline dimer of Formula 1 in compound (B-75) (paragraph 0086 and page 20), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image3.png
262
421
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kambe teaches that using a phenanthroline dimer in the charge generation layer of an organic EL device results in an organic EL device with high luminous efficiency and which can be driven at low voltage (paragraph 0054, lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the phenanthroline dimer of Kambe into the charge generation layer of the light-emitting element of Yoo in order to obtain an organic EL device with high luminous efficiency and which can be driven at low voltage, as taught by Kambe.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Yoo et al. (US 2016/0043327 A1)as applied above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 110128424 A, using the previously provided translation for references).
With respect to claim 15, Yoo teaches the material of claim 1, as discussed above.
However, Yoo does not teach nor fairly suggest that the material is present in the electron injection layer.
In analogous art, Zhang teaches an analogous electron transport material for use in an organic EL device (paragraph 0002) wherein the material comprises a phenanthroline moiety (Chemical Formula 1), and is present in an electron transport layer which is doped with alkali metals (paragraph 0008).
Zhang expands upon the work of Yoo by teachings that compounds with an o-phenanthroline group and aromatic heterocyclic groups are able to improve electron injection and transport, which enable the compounds to have a wide band gap, and high triplet state (paragraph 0045), improve device efficiency, and extend device lifetime (paragraph 0008).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound of Yoo in an electron injection layer of an organic electroluminescent device in order to improve the electron injection of the device, improve device efficiency, and extend device lifetime, as taught by Zhang.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 2016/0043327 A1) as applied above and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (WO 2015/102118 A1, using the provided translation for references).
With respect to claim 16, Yoo teaches the organic EL element of claim 8, as discussed above.
However, Yoo does not teach nor fairly suggest that the emitting material layer also includes an organic compound of instant general formula (2).
In analogous art, Hatakeyama teaches polycyclic aromatic compounds for use in the light emitting layer (paragraph 0331) of an organic electroluminescent element (paragraph 0001) which have a large HOMO-LUMO gap and high triplet excitation energy (paragraph 0035) and display thermally activated delayed fluorescence (TADF) (paragraph 0035).
Hatakeyama gives an example of the inventive compound in Compound (1-401) (paragraph 0016), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image4.png
222
244
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant general formula (2) when Za, Zb, and Zc are all a 6-membered aryl ring (benzene), Z1 and Z2 are each NRa, wherein Ra is a C6 aryl (phenyl) group, and Y is a boron atom.
Hatakeyama teaches that the compounds of the invention provide an excellent organic EL device when a layer comprises the compound.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the thermally activated delayed fluorescent material of Hatakeyama in the emission layer of Yoo in order to incorporate a fluorescent compound with a large HOMO-LUMO gap, high triplet excitation energy, TADF emission, and which provides an excellent EL device (paragraph 0046), as taught by Hatakeyama.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M..
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.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
