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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from consideration in the current application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-10) in the reply filed on November 18, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference signs mentioned in the description:
[0092] of the specification as originally filed recites “the display area DA.” DA does not appear to be depicted in any figure.
[0092] of the specification as originally filed recites “a pad area PDA.” PDA does not appear to be depicted in any figure.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-10 are 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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, and 8 are indefinite as the recitation of possible elements is not properly claimed in the alternative. Treatment of claims reciting alternatives is not governed by the particular format used (e.g., alternatives may be set forth as "a material selected from the group consisting of A, B, and C" or "wherein the material is A, B, or C"). See, e.g., the Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications ("Supplementary Guidelines"), 76 Fed. Reg. 7162, 7166 (February 9, 2011). Alternative expressions are permitted if they present no uncertainty or ambiguity with respect to the question of scope or clarity of the claims. A Markush grouping is a closed group of alternatives, i.e., the selection is made from a group "consisting of" (rather than "comprising" or "including") the alternative members. Abbott Labs., 334 F.3d at 1280, 67 USPQ2d at 1196. If a Markush grouping requires a material selected from an open list of alternatives (e.g., selected from the group "comprising" or "consisting essentially of" the recited alternatives), the claim should generally be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim. If a claim is intended to encompass combinations or mixtures of the alternatives set forth in the Markush grouping, the claim may include qualifying language preceding the recited alternatives (such as "at least one member" selected from the group), or within the list of alternatives (such as "or mixtures thereof"). Id. at 1281. See MPEP 2173.05(h). For the purposes of examination:
Claim 1 will be interpreted as reciting “R1 is any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5.”
Claim 1 will be interpreted as reciting “R2 is any one selected from the group consisting of hydrogen (H), …, and
PNG
media_image1.png
47
122
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.” Alternatively, claim 1 could be amended to recite “R2 is any one selected from hydrogen (H), …, or
PNG
media_image1.png
47
122
media_image1.png
Greyscale
” to overcome the aforementioned deficiency.
Claim 1 will be interpreted as reciting “X is a heteroatom that is any one selected from the group consisting of oxygen (O), …, and phosphors (P).” Alternatively, claim 1 could be amended to recite “X is a heteroatom that is any one selected from oxygen (O), …, or
Claim 1 will be interpreted as reciting “R3 is at least one selected from the group consisting of a C3-C13 alkyl group, …, and a C4-C13 alkenyl ether group.” Alternatively, claim 1 could be amended to recite “R3 is at least one selected from a C3-C13 alkyl group, …, or 4-C13 alkenyl ether group” to overcome the aforementioned deficiency.
Claim 1 will be interpreted as reciting “R4 is at least one selected from the group consisting of a C1-C15 alkyl group, …, and a C2-C15 alkenyl ether group.” Alternatively, claim 1 could be amended to recite “R4 is at least one selected from a C1-C15 alkyl group, …, or 2-C15 alkenyl ether group” to overcome the aforementioned deficiency.
Claim 6 will be interpreted as reciting “Formula 1 is any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas A1 to C1.”
Claim 6 will be interpreted as reciting “Formula 2 is any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas A2 to C2.”
Claim 6 will be interpreted as reciting “R2 is any one selected from the group consisting of hydrogen (H), …, and
PNG
media_image1.png
47
122
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.” Alternatively, claim 6 could be amended to recite “R2 is any one selected from hydrogen (H), …, or
PNG
media_image1.png
47
122
media_image1.png
Greyscale
” to overcome the aforementioned deficiency.
Claim 6 will be interpreted as reciting “R4 is at least one selected from the group consisting of a C1-C15 alkyl group, …, and a C2-C15 alkenyl ether group.” Alternatively, claim 6 could be amended to recite “R4 is at least one selected from a C1-C15 alkyl group, …, or 2-C15 alkenyl ether group” to overcome the aforementioned deficiency.”
Claim 7 will be interpreted as reciting “comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of Formulas A1 to C1.”
Claim 7 will be interpreted as reciting “at least one selected from the group consisting of Formulas A2 to C2.”
Claim 8 will be interpreted as reciting “comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of compounds represented by Formulas D to F.”
Claim 8 will be interpreted as reciting “R5 and R6 are each independently any one selected from the group consisting of a C1-C10 alkyl group, …, and a C2-C10 alkenyl ether group.” Alternatively, claim 8 could be amended to recite “R5 and R6 are each independently any one selected from a C1-C10 alkyl group, …, or and a C2-C10 alkenyl ether group” to overcome the aforementioned deficiency.
Correction is required.
Claims 2-5, 9, and 10 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, since these claims depend from the claims rejected above and do not remedy the aforementioned deficiencies.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 7 depends from claim 6, where both claim 6 and claim 7 require the light emitting element solvent to comprise a solvent molecule compound of Formulas A1, B1, and/or C1, and comprise an ion remover compound of Formulas A2, B2, and/or C2. Although claim 6 and claim 7 recite different verbiage to articulate these limitations, the scope of claim 6 and claim 7 is identical. Therefore, claim 7 fails to further limit the scope of claim 6, and is deficient under 35 USC 112(d).
Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 112(d) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Distinctions between the instant claims and closest prior art of record are below:
Ko et al. (US 2022/0093817 A1) teaches a light emitting element ink comprising a light emitting element solvent, and light emitting elements dispersed in the solvent, where each light emitting element comprises a plurality of semiconductor layers and an insulating film surrounding outer surfaces of the semiconductor layers (Ko, Abstract, [0005]-[0011], [0021]-[0022]). Ko teaches the solvent comprises a solvent molecule represented by [Chemical Formula 1] or more specifically [Chemical Formula 2] or [Chemical Formula 4] (Ko, [0022]-[0027], [0175]-[0184], [Chemical Formula 1], [Chemical Formula 2], [Chemical Formula 4]). Ko fails to teach a light emitting element solvent comprising an ion remover represented by Formula 2 with R1 being any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5 of claim 1.
Sim et al. (US 2022/0093818 A1) teaches an ink exhibiting electrical conductivity and dielectric properties comprising a first solvent, a second solvent, and light emitting elements (Sim, Abstract, [0004]-[0022]). Sim fails to teach a light emitting element solvent comprising a solvent molecule represented by Formula 1 with R1 being any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5 of claim 1; and fails to teach light emitting element solvent comprising an ion remover represented by Formula 2 with R1 being any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5 of claim 1.
Pan et al. (US 2018/0237649 A1) teaches an ink comprising inorganic materials and ester-based organic solvent for electronic devices (Pan, Abstract, [0009]-[0024]). Pan fails to teach a light emitting element solvent comprising an ion remover represented by Formula 2 with R1 being any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5 of claim 1.
Huang et al. (US 2012/0074535 A1) teaches a dielectric material and an additive having a Si-X-Si bridge structure (Huang, Abstract, [0012]-[0023]). Huang fails to teach a light emitting element comprising a plurality of semiconductor layers and an insulating film surrounding an outer surface of the semiconductor layers; fails to teach a light emitting element solvent comprising a solvent molecule represented by Formula 1 with R1 being any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5 of claim 1; and fails to teach light emitting element solvent comprising an ion remover represented by Formula 2 with R1 being any one selected from the group consisting of Formulas 3 to 5 of claim 1.
The prior art of record, whether taken alone or in combination, does not disclose or render obvious the claimed invention. In view of the foregoing, the instant claims are considered to contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELI D STRAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7088. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 7 pm.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/Eli D. Strah/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782