DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the amended limitation “wherein the at least one first component further comprises a metal oxide that is one selected from the group consisting of ZrO2, MgO, Y2O3, In2O3, and Ga2O3” in combination with “wherein the middle layer contains at least one first component comprising a metal fluoride” would fail to comply with the enablement requirement for reasons as follow:
The specification of the instant application discloses that the middle layer 4 contains at least one first component selected from SiO2, SiO, a metal oxide, and a metal fluoride, preferably SiO2 (paragraph 19) and a second component preferably ZnS such that the preferable combination of the first component and the second component of the middle layer 4 is ZnS-SiO2 (paragraph 20). Then, the specification discloses material properties such as an amorphous condition, a bandgap, a surface free energy, and a thickness for the middle layer 4 (paragraphs 22-25). However, the specification does not further describe any enabling disclosure clearly and fully as to 1) how the middle layer including the combination of the metal oxide and the metal fluoride, and the second component are formed, 2) what ratios the metal oxide, the metal fluoride, and the second component are contained for the middle layer, and 3) how the amorphous state, the bandgap, the surface free energy, and the thickness as claimed would be affected by the middle layer including the combination of the metal oxide, the metal fluoride, and the second component [underlying for clarity]. As such, undue experimentation would be required for determining the undisclosed conditions 1) and 2) and 3) as discussed above.
Accordingly, after considering all of the evidence of record related to the pertinent Wands factors and reasons discussed above, one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the application was filed, would not have been able to make and/or use the full scope of the claimed invention without undue experimentation.
Claim 3 reciting “wherein the at least one first component further comprises SiO2” in combination with “wherein the middle layer contains at least one first component comprising a metal fluoride” would also fail to comply with the enablement requirement for the similar reasons as discussed above.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 15, 18-20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang (US 2018/0026084 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kang teaches a light-emitting element comprising: a first electrode (a first electrode EL1); a second electrode (a second electrode EL2) facing the first electrode; a light-emitting layer (a second emission layer EML2) provided between the first electrode and the second electrode; a first charge transport layer (a first hole transport layer HTL1) provided between the first electrode and the light-emitting layer; and a middle layer (a first electron injection layer EIL1) provided between the first charge transport layer and the light-emitting layer, wherein the middle layer contains at least one first component comprising a metal fluoride (EIL1 formed of a metal fluoride such as LiF or CsF), and the middle layer has a thickness of 2 to 10 nm, inclusive (EIL1 having a thickness of about 90 Å, which is equivalent to 9 nm) (Fig. 5A and paragraphs 52-83).
Regarding claim 4, Kang teaches wherein the metal fluoride is at least one selected from LiF, LiAl3Fl4, Li3AlF6, CsF, Na5Al3F14, Na3AlF6, MgF2, CaF2, BaF2, YF3, LaF3, CeF3, and NdF3 (paragraphs 67-70).
Regarding claim 15, Kang teaches wherein the middle layer further has a surface free energy of 50 mN/m or greater (EIL1 formed of LiF would have a surface free energy greater than 50 mN/m as a material property) (paragraphs 67-70).
Regarding claim 18, Kang teaches wherein the first charge transport layer is a hole transport layer (paragraph 82).
Regarding claim 19, Kang teaches wherein the first charge transport layer has a surface free energy of 0 to 50 mN/m exclusive (paragraph 63. Since Kang teaches the identical organic material choice for the first charge transport layer compared to that of the invention described in paragraph 36, its surface free energy as a material property would be the same).
Regarding claim 20, Kang teaches wherein the first charge transport layer is composed of an organic material (paragraph 63).
Regarding claim 23, Kang teaches a display device comprising the light-emitting element according to claim 1 (Fig. 1 and paragraph 36).
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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang.
Regarding claim 11, While Kang does not explicitly teach that the middle layer further has a bandgap of 3 to 4 eV inclusive, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a metal fluoride material for the middle layer having a bandgap between 3eV and 4 eV such as nickel fluoride as a readily available material choice for obtaining the similar metal fluoride characteristics.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2021/0126218 A1; hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 13, Kang does not explicitly teach that the light-emitting layer contains a quantum dot coordinated with an inorganic ligand. Kim teaches a light-emitting element, comprising a light-emitting layer (a light emitting layer 140), wherein the light-emitting layer contains a quantum dot (a quantum dot 141) coordinated with an inorganic ligand (ligands attached to 141 and formed of metal halide) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 3-5, 56, 78-80, and 99). Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kang with that of Kim in order to improve luminous efficiency for the light emitting layer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 and 9-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejections as set forth above in this Office Action.
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 DANIEL B WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3418. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8AM-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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL WHALEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights