CTNF 18/311,769 CTNF 83866 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION 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. Claims 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Independent claims 1, 18 and 20 recite the limitation that the first hole transport layer has a conductivity of about 6.0 x 10 -5 cm/V⸳s to about 10.0 x 10 -4 cm/V⸳s. The unit cm/V⸳s is the standard unit for charge carrier mobility, not electrical conductivity. Electrical conductivity has the units Siemens per centimeter (S/cm). Claims 1, 18, and 20 are therefore indefinite as it is not clear whether or not Applicants are claiming conductivity in the classical sense or charge carrier mobility, or more specifically, hole mobility in these claims. For purposes of further Examination, claims 1, 18, and 20 will be interpreted as including a first hole transport layer which has a hole mobility of about 6.0 x 10 -5 cm/V⸳s to about 10.0 x 10 -4 cm/V⸳s. Claims 2-17, 19, and 21-24 are included with this rejection as they are dependent from claims 1, 18, or 20. Correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1-3 and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mun et al. (US 2025/0107436) as evidenced by Kim et al (US 2025/0127042). Mun et al. has a foreign application date of 11/12/21, which is earlier than Applicants filing date and (unperfected) foreign priority date and qualifies as prior art under 102(a)(2). The subject matter relied upon in Mun et al. is fully supported in the KR-20210155740 foreign application document . Claim 1: Mun et al. teaches organic electroluminescent devices. Table 13 of Mun et al. is drawn to specific organic electroluminescent elements. The organic electroluminescent elements in Table 13 are comprised of a first electrode (anode), a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, a first light-emitting auxiliary layer, a second light-emitting auxiliary layer, an emission layer, an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, and a second electrode (cathode). While Mun et al. refers to a first auxiliary layer and a second auxiliary layer, these layers are part of the hole transport region and therefore also play the role as hole transporting layers. As such, the first light-emitting auxiliary layer may refer to Applicants first hole transport layer and the second light-emitting auxiliary layer may refer to Applicants second hole transport layer. Independent claim 1 does not require the first hole transport layer as claimed to be in direct contact with the first electrode, only that it is adjacent to said first electrode. The first light-emitting auxiliary layer is closer to the first electrode than the second light-emitting auxiliary layer and it can therefore be said that the first light-emitting auxiliary layer is adjacent to the first electrode. Further, as described below, the structural limitations of the first and second light-emitting auxiliary layers are indistinguishable from the first and second hole transport materials as claimed by Applicants. As one example, test example 17 in table 13 employs compound P-90 as the first light-emitting auxiliary material and compound 1-13 as the second-light emitting auxiliary material Compound P-90 has the structure PNG media_image1.png 164 178 media_image1.png Greyscale (page 29). This compound anticipates Formula 1 of claim 1 with Ar 2 equal to a p -phenylene group, Ar 1 equal to a p -phenylene group, R 1 equal to an adamantyl group, which is a cycloalkyl group having 10 ring-forming carbon atoms, L is a direct linkage, and FR is a group satisfying Formula 2-1 with X 1 equal to CR c R d with R c and R d equal to methyl groups, and n1 and m equal to zero. Additionally, compound 1-90 has a hole mobility of 7.9 x 10 -4 as evidenced in Table 7 of Kim et al (page 77), which falls within the 6.0 x 10 -5 to 10.0 x 10 -4 range of claim 1. Additionally, the first light-emitting auxiliary layer is located on the cathode side of the device, which satisfies the limitation that the first hole transport layer is adjacent to the first electrode. The first light-emitting auxiliary layer therefore satisfies all of the structural and physical property limitations of the first hole transport layer as recited in claim 1. The second light-emitting auxiliary layer which is located between the first light-emitting auxiliary layer and the emission layer in test example 17 is compound 1-13 and has the structure PNG media_image2.png 210 198 media_image2.png Greyscale (page 15). While Mun et al. does not explicitly teach that compound 1-13 has a higher refractive index than compound 1-90 of Mun et al., it would be expected that compound 1-13 has a higher refractive index given the knowledge of a person having ordinary skill in the art and the teachings of Applicants specification. Specifically, compound 1-13 is nearly identical to compound H-1-9 as taught in Applicants specification, which represents a second hole transport layer having a refractive index greater than the first hole transport layer. Compound 1-13 differs in that the carbazole is bonded in a meta linkage whereas compound H-1-9 is bonded in a para linkage. Compound H-1-9 is taught in Applicants specification as being a preferred material in the second hole transport layer. As such, it would be expected that compound H-1-9 would satisfy all of Applicants refractive index limitations (absent evidence to the contrary). Compound 1-90 of Mun et al. is additionally employed as a material in the first hole transport layer in example 1 of Applicants specification. It is understood that replacing an aromatic ring for a cycloalkyl group replaces the easily distorted p -electrons with tightly held sigma bonds ( s -bonds). Localized sigma electrons have a much lower molecular polarizability, which in turn lowers the overall refractive index of the molecule. Therefore, text example17 of Mun et al. satisfies all of the device and structural limitations of claim 1. Claim 2: Because compound 1-90 of Mun et al. is the same as compound 1 of Applicants specification, which is a particularly preferred and exemplified compound, it would be expected that compound 1-90 would have a refractive index which falls within the about 1.4 to about 1.75 range of claim 2. Claim 3: Because compound 1-13 of Mun et al. is nearly identical to H-1-9 of Applicants specification, which is a particularly preferred compound to serve as the second hole transport layer, it would be expected that compound 1-13 would have a refractive index which falls within the about 1.8 to about 2.0 range of claim 3. Claim 12: Compound 1-90 of Mun et al. further satisfies Formula 1-2 of claim 12 with all variable assignments being described in claim 1 above. Claim 13: Compound 1-90 of Mun et al. further satisfies Formula 3 of claim 13 with s1 and s2 equal to zero and all other variable assignments being described in claim 1 above. Claim 14: In compound 1-90, R 1 is an unsubstituted adamantyl group, thereby satisfying claim 14. Claim 15: In compound 1-90, R c and R d are methyl groups, thereby satisfying claim 15. Claim 16: Claim 16 serves to further limit an optional embodiment of claim 1 where FR is represented by Formula 2-2. Because claim 16 is not a required element, Mun et al. may be properly relied upon to reject claim 16. Claim 17: Compound 1-90 of Mun et al. is identical to compound 1 of claim 17. Claim 18: The rejection of claim 1 is wholly incorporated into claim 18. As described above, Mun et al. teaches a device embodiment which includes a first hole transport layer which satisfies the hole mobility and structural limitations of claim 18. Claim 19: The second light-emitting auxiliary layer of Mun et al. in test example 17 is compound 1-13 whose structure is shown in claim 1 above. Compound 1-13 satisfies Formula H-1 of claim 19. As applied to Formula H-1, compound 1-13 has Ar c equal to an unsubstituted biphenyl group, p equal to 2, L 1 equal to phenylene, Ar a equal to an unsubstituted heteroaryl group (N-bonded carbazolyl), g equal to 1, L 2 equal to phenylene, and Ar b equal to an unsubstituted phenyl group . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun et al. (US 2025/0107436) . The rejection of claims 1-3 as described above are wholly incorporated into the rejection of claims 20 and 21. Table 13 of Mun et al. includes embodiments (such as text example 17) which satisfy the light-emitting element of claim 1. While the device examples only includes one light-emitting element, the preparation of a light-emitting device which comprises a plurality of light-emitting elements as required by claim 20 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art given the overall teachings of Mun et al. Specifically, Fig. 3 of Mun et al. teaches a device embodiment which comprises a plurality of light-emitting elements, including those having 2 or 3 emitting units (where n is equal to 1 or 2, and paragraph 0069). Given that Mun et al. explicitly teaches a device embodiment having three light-emitting units in sequence, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have prepared such a light-emitting device according to Fig. 3 where any one of the light-emitting stacks comprises a hole transport region which satisfies all of the limitations of the first and second hole transport layers of claims 20 and 21. The device in Fig. 3 is understood to be a white-light emitting device where a red light-emitting stack, a green light-emitting stack, and a blue light- emitting stack are employed so as to achieve white light emission which further satisfies claim 22. Comment on Patentability While all claims stand rejected, claims 4-8, 11, 23, and 24 are free of any prior art rejections. Claim 4 requires a third hole transport layer between the second hole transport layer and the emission layer. Mun et al. does not teach or suggest such an additional layer. Claims 5-8 contain allowable subject matter by virtue of their dependency on claim 4. Regarding claim 11, Mun et al. also does not teach or suggest including a p-dopant in the first light-emitting auxiliary layer. Last, Mun et al. does not teach or otherwise suggest a light emitting element which satisfies claims 23 and 24. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S LOEWE whose telephone number is (571)270-3298. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1302. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /Robert S Loewe/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/311,769 Page 2 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/311,769 Page 3 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/311,769 Page 4 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/311,769 Page 5 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/311,769 Page 6 Art Unit: 1766 Application/Control Number: 18/311,769 Page 7 Art Unit: 1766
Prosecution Insights