Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/297,752

ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT MATERIALS AND DEVICES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 10, 2023
Priority
Apr 18, 2022 — provisional 63/332,165 +18 more
Examiner
CLARK, GREGORY D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
UNIVERSAL DISPLAY Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allowance Rate
1042 granted / 1230 resolved
+24.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
1261
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1230 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The office acknowledges the receipt of applicants’ response to the restriction requirement dated 07/23/2026. Elected Species PNG media_image1.png 322 650 media_image1.png Greyscale A search of the prior art did not show the elected species. As no claims where specifically drawn to applicants’ elected species in independent form, no claims have been indicated as allowable. Claims written in independent form which require all the limitations of the elected species along with any dependent claims which require all the limitations of the elected species would be allowable. Under MPEP 803.02, the search was expanded to find an examinable species. Examinable Species The examinable species is represented by: PNG media_image2.png 191 168 media_image2.png Greyscale The examinable species reads on claims 1-9, 11-13, 17-20. Claim 10, 14-16 are withdrawn from further consideration as not reading on the examinable species. 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. Claim(s) 1-9, 11-13, 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (KR 20160082871 A). Regarding Claims 1-9,11-13, Lee teaches an iridium complex represented by PD-95 (page 6): PNG media_image2.png 191 168 media_image2.png Greyscale PD-95 reads on applicants’ first Ligand LA wherein Z1 = N; Z2 -Z4 = C; K1 and K2 = direct bond; RA = methyl; RB = fluorine; L = cyclohexyl; Ring A = pyridine; Ring B = phenyl (per claims 1-7) LA = PNG media_image3.png 246 168 media_image3.png Greyscale , PNG media_image4.png 162 96 media_image4.png Greyscale X6 = RAA= methyl; X3 =RBB= F; remaining X(s)= CH (per claims 8-9) PD-95 reads M(LA)2LB)q(LC)r; p =1, q-2, r=0 (per claim11) PD-95 reads Ir(LA)(LB)2 (per claim 12). PD-95 reads on PNG media_image5.png 192 110 media_image5.png Greyscale Y3 = methyl; remaining Y(s) = CH; K1 = direct bond (per claim 13). Regarding Claims 17-18 and 20, Lee teaches light emitting device comprising a first electrode, a second electrode facing the first electrode, and an organic light emitting layer positioned between the first and second electrodes and including the aforementioned phosphorescent compound, PD-95 (machine trans page 39 of 52) (per claim 17). CPB (carbazole based material) is used as the host (machine trans49 of 52) (per claim 18). Lee teaches the light emitting diode may be used in various electronic devices such as an image display device or an illumination device (machine trans page 51 of 52) (per claim 20). 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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 20160082871 A) in view of BOUDREAULT (US 20200227659 A1). Regarding Claim, Lee teaches a host material based on a carbazole but fails to teach applicants’ host. BOUDREAULT teaches an OLED comprises: an anode; a cathode; and an organic layer disposed between the anode and the cathode, wherein the organic layer comprises a compound comprising a ligand (paragraph 110). The organic layer may also have a host comprising at least one chemical group selected from the group consisting of triphenylene, carbazole, dibenzothiophene, dibenzofuran, dibenzoselenophene, azatriphenylene, azacarbazole, aza-dibenzothiophene, aza-dibenzofuran, and aza-dibenzoselenophene. A specific example can be represented by (paragraph 120): PNG media_image6.png 220 348 media_image6.png Greyscale . Both Lee and BOUDREAULT teach host materials that are carbazole based and BOUDREAULT give an example of a specific carbazole based material. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of invention to have selected from known carbazole based host which would have included the above carbazole dibenzothiophene material which reads on the instant limitations, absent unexpected results (per claim 19). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY D CLARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7087. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-4PM M-F. 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 Chriss can be reached on 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 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. /GREGORY D CLARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 10, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12741981
METAL COMPLEX AND USE THEREOF
3y 10m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12735437
ORGANIC MOLECULES FOR OPTOELECTRONIC DEVICES
3y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12740317
ORGANIC LIGHT EMITTING ELEMENT
3y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12727376
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE AND POLYCYCLIC COMPOUND FOR THE SAME
4y 2m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12703824
ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT ELEMENT
3y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+8.2%)
3y 1m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1230 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month