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 Objections
Claims 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: it is suggested that "is to emit" be changed to "emits" for ease of reading.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 15 is 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.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites "a solvent radius (probe)". The claim is indefinite because it is unclear if the limitation inside the parenthetical is optional and how or if the prove is required. Does the solvent radius mean the radius of the solvent molecule used as a probe?
For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted such that the solvent radius refers to the radius of the solvent molecule used as a probe.
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.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US-20230097942-A1 (hereinafter "Kim").
Regarding claims 1-6 and 10-20, Kim teaches an organic light-emitting device comprising an organic layer that is located between a first electrode and a second electrode and including an emission layer, wherein the emission layer includes at least one polycyclic compound represented by Formula 1 as a dopant (¶ [0129]-[0131]), wherein the emission layer further includes a host and the amount of host in the emission layer may be greater than the amount of the polycyclic compound (¶ [0131]). Kim teaches that the device further includes a hole transport region between the first electrode and the emission layer and an electron transport region between the emission layer and the second electrode, and the hole transport region may include a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an electron blocking layer, or any combination thereof, and the electron transport region may include a hole blocking layer, an electron transport layer, an electron injection layer, or any combination thereof (¶ [0139]). Kim teaches the polycyclic compound may emits blue light (¶ [0132], ¶ [0127], ¶ [0135]). Kim teaches an electronic apparatus including the organic light-emitting device (¶ [0439]) and the electronic device may be applied in a display, and a lighting device (¶ [0440]). Kim teaches the device possesses long lifespan and excellent color purity (¶ [0134], ¶ [0005], ¶ [0123]-[0124]). Kim teaches examples of the polycyclic compound represented by Formula 1 including compound 196
PNG
media_image1.png
406
499
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(page 69).
Kim does not specifically teach wherein the polycyclic compound satisfies claimed Expression 1, measured by Connolly surface analysis wherein the Connolly surface analysis is performed under conditions of a grid interval of about 0.15 Å, a Van Der Waals scale factor of about 1.0 Å, and a solvent radius (probe) of about 1.4 Å, claimed Expression 2, or claimed Expression 3. However, the compound 196
PNG
media_image2.png
419
499
media_image2.png
Greyscale
is a positional isomer of the compound 15 recited in the instant specification
PNG
media_image3.png
367
670
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein the t-butyl group circled above is para-bonded instead of meta-bonded, and the Formula 1 of Kim encompasses the positional isomer.
Given the general formula and teachings of Kim, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the positional isomer of compound 196 wherein the t-butyl group circled above is meta-bonded instead of para-bonded. One of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would have been motivated to produce additional compounds represented by Formula 1 in order to pursue the known options within their technical grasp and would expect the isomeric compounds to be useful as a dopant in the emissive layer of the device of Kim and possess the properties of long lifespan and excellent color purity taught by Kim. A prima facie case of obviousness exists when chemical compounds have very close structural similarity and similar utilities. See MPEP § 2144.09 I. When compounds which are position isomers or homologs are of sufficiently close structural similarity, there is an expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. See MPEP § 2144.09 II.
The modified compound 196 of Kim meets claimed Formula 1.
Kim appears silent with respect to the properties of claimed Expression 1, measured by Connolly surface analysis wherein the Connolly surface analysis is performed under conditions of a grid interval of about 0.15 Å, a Van Der Waals scale factor of about 1.0 Å, and a solvent radius (probe) of about 1.4 Å, claimed Expression 2, or claimed Expression 3.
The instant specification recites that compound 15 has a SA1/V1 of 0.8007 Å-1 (TABLE 2) and thus because 0.8007 Å-1 is less than 0.89 Å-1, Expression 1 is met. The instant specification recites that DABNA-1 has a SA1/V1 of 0.9845 Å-1 (TABLE 2). It is the case that 0.9845 Å-1 * 0.9 equals 0.8861 Å-1 and thus because 0.8007 Å-1 is less than 0.8861 Å-1, Expression 3 is met. Since Kim teaches the modified compound 196, which is identical to the compound 15, the same structure as disclosed by the applicant, the properties of claimed Expression 1, measured by Connolly surface analysis wherein the Connolly surface analysis is performed under conditions of a grid interval of about 0.15 Å, a Van Der Waals scale factor of about 1.0 Å, and a solvent radius (probe) of about 1.4 Å, claimed Expression 2, and claimed Expression 3 are considered to be inherent and would be expected to fall within the range in the claim, absent evidence otherwise. Recitation of a newly disclosed property does not distinguish over a reference disclosure of the article or composition claims. When the structure recited in the prior art reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Applicant bears responsibility for proving that the reference composition does not possess the characteristics recited in the claims. See MPEP § 2112.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US-20230097942-A1 (hereinafter "Kim") as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of Koo et al. US-20050116291-A1 ("Koo").
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches the device comprising the modified compound as discussed above with respect to claim 6.
Kim does not specifically teach wherein the device further comprises a thin-film transistor, wherein the thin-film transistor comprises a source electrode and a drain electrode, and the first electrode of the light-emitting device is electrically connected to the source electrode or the drain electrode of the thin-film transistor.
Koo teaches provides an apparatus for use in a display device in which gradation is displayed easily by optimizing heat treatment conditions of thin film transistors (¶ [0011]). Koo teaches an organic electroluminescence display device comprising a thin film transistor comprising an active layer formed on an insulating substrate and equipped with source regions and drain regions, and a protection film formed on a surface of an insulating substrate having the thin film transistor and equipped with a via hole for exposing a part of the source electrode or the drain electrode, wherein an organic emitting device is electrically coupled to the thin film transistor through the via hole (¶ [0013]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate thin film transistor comprising an active layer formed on an insulating substrate and equipped with source regions and drain regions, and a protection film formed on a surface of an insulating substrate having the thin film transistor and equipped with a via hole for exposing a part of the source electrode or the drain electrode, wherein an organic light emitting device of Kim is electrically coupled to the thin film transistor through the via hole, based on the teaching of Koo. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an apparatus for use in a display device in which gradation is displayed easily by optimizing heat treatment conditions of thin film transistors, as taught by Koo.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US-20230097942-A1 (hereinafter "Kim") as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of Yoon et al. US-20190305227-A1 (hereinafter "Yoon").
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches the device comprising the modified compound as discussed above with respect to claim 6.
Kim does not specifically teach wherein the device further comprises a color filter, a color conversion layer, a touch screen layer, a polarizing layer, or any combination thereof.
Yoon teaches an organic light emission display device including a color filter that absorbs light generated from an organic electroluminescent device (¶ [0114]). Yoon teaches that adopting the color filter may allow the organic light emission display device to render a full color range (¶ [0114]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a color filter into the device of Kim, based on the teaching of Yoon. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for the device to render a full color range, as taught by Yoon.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US-20230097942-A1 (hereinafter "Kim") as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of Koo et al. US-20050116291-A1 ("Koo") and Yoon et al. US-20190305227-A1 (hereinafter "Yoon").
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches the device comprising the modified compound as discussed above with respect to claim 6.
Kim does not specifically teach wherein the device further comprises a thin-film transistor, wherein the thin-film transistor comprises a source electrode and a drain electrode, and the first electrode of the light-emitting device is electrically connected to the source electrode or the drain electrode of the thin-film transistor, and a color filter, a color conversion layer, a touch screen layer, a polarizing layer, or any combination thereof.
Koo teaches provides an apparatus for use in a display device in which gradation is displayed easily by optimizing heat treatment conditions of thin film transistors (¶ [0011]). Koo teaches an organic electroluminescence display device comprising a thin film transistor comprising an active layer formed on an insulating substrate and equipped with source regions and drain regions, and a protection film formed on a surface of an insulating substrate having the thin film transistor and equipped with a via hole for exposing a part of the source electrode or the drain electrode, wherein an organic emitting device is electrically coupled to the thin film transistor through the via hole (¶ [0013]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate thin film transistor comprising an active layer formed on an insulating substrate and equipped with source regions and drain regions, and a protection film formed on a surface of an insulating substrate having the thin film transistor and equipped with a via hole for exposing a part of the source electrode or the drain electrode, wherein an organic light emitting device of Kim is electrically coupled to the thin film transistor through the via hole, based on the teaching of Koo. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an apparatus for use in a display device in which gradation is displayed easily by optimizing heat treatment conditions of thin film transistors, as taught by Koo.
Kim in view of Koo does not specifically teach wherein the device further comprises a color filter, a color conversion layer, a touch screen layer, a polarizing layer, or any combination thereof.
Yoon teaches an organic light emission display device including a color filter that absorbs light generated from an organic electroluminescent device (¶ [0114]). Yoon teaches that adopting the color filter may allow the organic light emission display device to render a full color range (¶ [0114]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a color filter into the device of Kim in view of Koo, based on the teaching of Yoon. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for the device to render a full color range, as taught by Yoon.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US-20230084208-A1, cited on IDS of 07/12/2024 recites an organic light-emitting device comprising boron-containing compounds (¶ [0029] and [0007]), including 113 (¶ [0122], page 38) and 195 (¶ [0122], page 1187).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth M. Dahlburg whose telephone number is 571-272-6424. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET, and alternate Fridays.
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 Boyd can be reached at 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 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.
/ELIZABETH M. DAHLBURG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
