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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyatkin et al. (US 2018/0026210) (hereafter “Dyatkin”) in view of Lee et al. (US 2013/0334521) (hereafter “Lee”).
Regarding claims 1-6 and 8-20, Dyatkin teaches an electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a hole transporting layer, a light emitting layer, an electron transporting layer, and a cathode (paragraph [0039]) (claims 15-17 and 19). Dyatkin teaches that the emission layer comprises a host material and dopant, where the dopant is an organometallic compound (paragraphs [0099]-[0104]) (claims 14-17). Dyatkin teaches that the organometallic compound is a iridium compound comprising 3 bidentate ligands, where two of the ligands is the same and one is different (paragraphs [0095]-[0098]) (claims 2 and 3). Dyatkin teaches that one of the ligands claims be
PNG
media_image1.png
112
137
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image2.png
101
135
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image3.png
127
139
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image4.png
141
138
media_image4.png
Greyscale
, and
PNG
media_image5.png
138
142
media_image5.png
Greyscale
are a few examples (paragraph [0095]) (claims 1, 5, 9, and 10-14). Dyatkin teaches that the other ligand can meet the following formula,
PNG
media_image6.png
147
93
media_image6.png
Greyscale
, where the R groups can be a hydrogen atom or a substituent group (paragraph [0097]) (Claims 1-4, 6, 8, and 10-14). Dyatkin teaches the compounds can have the following structure,
PNG
media_image7.png
162
231
media_image7.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image8.png
170
240
media_image8.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image9.png
165
259
media_image9.png
Greyscale
, and
PNG
media_image10.png
169
253
media_image10.png
Greyscale
are a few examples (paragraphs as an example (paragraphs [0095]-[0098]) (claims 1-6 and 8-14). Dyatkin teaches the electroluminescent device can be used in an electronic apparatus (paragraph [0032]) (claim 20).
Dyatkin does not teach where the phenylpyridine ligand comprise a silicon or germanium substituent.
Lee teaches that one can improve the emission efficiency of an electroluminescent device by adding a germanium substituent, such as
PNG
media_image11.png
40
64
media_image11.png
Greyscale
, onto the pyridine group of a phenylpyridne ligand (paragraphs [0014] and [0104], Table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the compounds of Dyatkin so the pyridine group in the phenylpyridine ligand comprises
PNG
media_image11.png
40
64
media_image11.png
Greyscale
as a substituent, as taught by Lee. The motivation would have been to improve the efficiency of the device. This would lead to the following compounds,
PNG
media_image12.png
138
161
media_image12.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image13.png
149
161
media_image13.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image14.png
135
154
media_image14.png
Greyscale
, and
PNG
media_image15.png
135
155
media_image15.png
Greyscale
, claimed the applicant and would inherently have an emission wavelength between 490nm and 550nm.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-13, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyatkin et al. (US 2018/0026210) (hereafter “Dyatkin”) in view of Kim et al. (J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2017, Vol. 17, No. 8) (hereafter “Kim”).
Regarding claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15-20, Dyatkin teaches an electroluminescent device comprising an anode, a hole transporting layer, a light emitting layer, an electron transporting layer, and a cathode (paragraph [0039]) (claims 15-17 and 19). Dyatkin teaches that the emission layer comprises a host material and dopant, where the dopant is an organometallic compound (paragraphs [0099]-[0104]) (claims 14-17). Dyatkin teaches that the organometallic compound is a iridium compound comprising 3 bidentate ligands, where two of the ligands is the same and one is different (paragraphs [0095]-[0098]) (claims 2 and 3). Dyatkin teaches that one of the ligands claims be
PNG
media_image1.png
112
137
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image2.png
101
135
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image3.png
127
139
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
PNG
media_image4.png
141
138
media_image4.png
Greyscale
, and
PNG
media_image5.png
138
142
media_image5.png
Greyscale
are a few examples (paragraph [0095]) (claims 1, 5, 9, and 10-13). Dyatkin teaches that the other ligand can meet the following formula,
PNG
media_image6.png
147
93
media_image6.png
Greyscale
, where the R groups can be a hydrogen atom or a substituent group (paragraph [0097]) (Claims 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-14). Dyatkin teaches the compounds can have the following structure,
PNG
media_image7.png
162
231
media_image7.png
Greyscale
and
PNG
media_image8.png
170
240
media_image8.png
Greyscale
, are a few examples (paragraphs as an example (paragraphs [0095]-[0098]) (claims 1-5 and 7-13). Dyatkin teaches the electroluminescent device can be used in an electronic apparatus (paragraph [0032]) (claim 20).
Dyatkin does not teach where the phenylpyridine ligand comprise a silicon or germanium substituent.
Kim teaches that one can improve the emission efficiency of an electroluminescent device by adding a silicon substituent, such as -Si(CH)3, onto the phenyl group of a phenylpyridine ligand (paragraphs [0014] and [0104], Table 1). Adding the groups limits self-quenching (page 5588 left compound first paragraph and page 5592 first full paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the compounds of Dyatkin so the phenyl group of the phenylpyridine group is substituted with -Si(CH)3, as taught by Kim. The motivation would have been to improve the emission efficiency of the device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yen et al. (2019/0296251) teaches ligands that meet applicant’s formula 1B.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW K BOHATY whose telephone number is (571)270-1148. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-4pm.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at (571)272-1234. 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.
/ANDREW K BOHATY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights