DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/19/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh et al. (US 2008/0278072 A1; hereinafter “Noh”) in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0315441 A1; hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 1, Noh teaches a mixed composition comprising: a metal oxide; and a metal halogen compound (a mixture of an electron transporting material, a metal oxide, and a metal halide for forming an electron transport layer by a solvent processing) (paragraphs 6-7 and 40-41).
Noh does not explicitly teach that 1) the mixed composition comprises an organic solvent used for the solvent processing for forming the electron transport layer and 2) the metal halogen is represented by Formula 2 M3(X1)n1 wherein, in Formula 2, M3 is Al, Zn, In, Ga, Ti, or Mg, X1 is independently Cl, Br, or I, and n1 is an integer from 1 to 3.
Regarding 1) the mixed composition comprises an organic solvent used for the solvent processing for forming the electron transport layer, Kim teaches a light-emitting device comprising an electron transport layer composition, wherein the electron transport layer composition including an organic solvent as one of suitable solvents for properly dispersing/forming the electron transport layer composition of a light-emitting device (paragraphs 15-24, and 71-72). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Noh with that of Kim in order to properly disperse/form the electron transport layer composition on the emission layer for forming the electron transport layer of the light-emitting device.
Regarding 2) the metal halogen is represented by Formula 2 M3(X1)n1 wherein, in Formula 2, M3 is Al, Zn, In, Ga, Ti, or Mg, X1 is independently Cl, Br, or I, and n1 is an integer from 1 to 3, Noh teaches examples of metal halides include LiF, MgF2, NaF, KF, or the like, which reads on the previously recited Formula 2 (See Noh, paragraph 41 and see the Office Action dated 04/01/2026 rejecting previously submitted claim 1) and the Formula 2 disclosed in the specification of the instant application (See paragraphs 53-55). While the amended claim currently deletes Fluorine “F” from for the Formula 2, the invention does not provide that one specific material (i.e., Cl, Br, or I) among previously recited material choices (i.e., “F, Cl, Br, or I”) is critical over another (i.e., F) for the halogen of the metal halogen. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would recognize that examples of the metal halides from Noh are not limited to LiF, MgF2, NaF, or KF, but also include other readily available metal halides as “the like” from Noh. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize alkaline earth metal halide such as MgCl2 or post-transition metal halide such as ZnCl2 for Formula 2 as readily available metal halides known in the art for obtaining the predictable metal halide material characteristics.
Regarding claim 2, Noh teaches wherein the metal oxide is represented by Formula 1 M11-xM2xOy wherein, in Formula 1, M1 and M2 each independently comprise Zn, Mg, Co, Mn, Y, Al, Ti, Zr, Sn, W, Ta, Ni, Mo, Cu, Ag, In, Nb, Fe, Ce, Sr, Ba, Si, Ga, or a combination thereof, x is 0≤x≤1, and y is 0<y≤5 (paragraph 41, MgO).
Regarding claim 3, Noh does not explicitly teach that M1 is Zn, and x is 0≤x≤0.5 for the metal oxide. Kim teaches the electron transport layer composition also including a metal oxide such as ZnO as a readily available electron transport material for improving electron transport efficiency (paragraphs 15-24 and 61-66). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Noh with that of Kim in order to utilize readily available electron transporting material for improving electron transport efficiency.
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches wherein an average diameter of the metal oxide is about 1 nanometer to about 50 nanometers (paragraph 65, 1-30 nm).
Regarding claim 6, While Noh in view of Kim does not explicitly teach that M3 in Formula 2 is Al, it is also well known in the art to utilize aluminum halide as a readily available metal halide material. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize various metal halides known in the art such as aluminum halide in order to obtain the predictable metal halide material characteristics.
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches wherein the solvent comprises an alcohol, an ether, an ester, a ketone, an aliphatic hydrocarbon, an aromatic hydrocarbon, or a combination thereof, wherein the solvent is optionally substituted with a halogen (paragraphs 71-72, alcohol).
Regarding claim 8, Noh teaches wherein an amount of the metal halogen compound in the mixed composition is greater than or equal to about 0.1 part by weight and less than or equal to about 50 parts by weight, and an amount of the metal oxide in the mixed composition is greater than or equal to about 0.1 part by weight and less than or equal to about 50 parts by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the metal oxide (paragraph 42).
Regarding claim 21, since Noh in view of Kim teaches the claimed mixed composition as discussed in claim 1, the claimed property for the mixed composition (i.e., “the mixed composition has a viscosity of 1 centipoise to 30 centipoise, and a surface tension of 10 dynes per centimeter to about 40 dynes per centimeter”) would be inherent: Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977) and MPEP 2112.01.
Claims 15-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh in view of Zampetti et al. (US 2021/0328165 A1; hereinafter “Zampetti”).
Regarding claim 15, Noh teaches a light-emitting device comprising: a first electrode (an anode) (paragraphs 6-7 and 48); a second electrode (a cathode) facing the first electrode (paragraphs 6-7 and 49); an emission layer (a light emitting layer) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode (paragraphs 6-7 and 52); and an electron transport layer (an electron transport layer) disposed directly on the emission layer, wherein the electron transport layer comprises a composite of a metal oxide and a metal halogen compound, and the composite directly contacts the emission layer (the electron transport layer including a mixture of an electron transporting material, a metal oxide, and a metal halide) (paragraphs 6-7 and 40-41).
Noh does not explicitly teach that 1) the emission layer comprises a quantum dot and 2) the metal halogen is represented by Formula 2 M3(X1)n1 wherein, in Formula 2, M3 is Al, Zn, In, Ga, Ti, or Mg, X1 is independently Cl, Br, or I, and n1 is an integer from 1 to 3.
Regarding 1) the emission layer comprises a quantum dot, Zampetti teaches a light-emitting device (a QD-LED 100), comprising an emission layer (an EML 140) with an electron transport layer (an electron transporting layer 150) directly on the emission layer, wherein the emission layer comprises a quantum dot (140 comprising a quantum dot QD) for obtaining high quantum efficiency (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 1, 55-58, and 64). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Noh with that of Zampetti in order to obtain high quantum efficiency for the light-emitting device.
Regarding 2) the metal halogen is represented by Formula 2 M3(X1)n1 wherein, in Formula 2, M3 is Al, Zn, In, Ga, Ti, or Mg, X1 is independently Cl, Br, or I, and n1 is an integer from 1 to 3, Noh teaches examples of metal halides include LiF, MgF2, NaF, KF, or the like, which reads on the previously recited Formula 2 (See Noh, paragraph 41 and see the Office Action dated 04/01/2026 rejecting previously submitted claim 15) and the Formula 2 disclosed in the specification of the instant application (See paragraphs 53-55). While the amended claim currently deletes Fluorine “F” from for the Formula 2, the invention does not provide that one specific material (i.e., Cl, Br, or I) among previously recited material choices (i.e., “F, Cl, Br, or I”) is critical over another (i.e., F) for the halogen of the metal halogen. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would recognize that examples of the metal halides from Noh are not limited to LiF, MgF2, NaF, or KF, but also include other readily available metal halides as “the like” from Noh. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize alkaline earth metal halide such as MgCl2 or post-transition metal halide such as ZnCl2 for Formula 2 as readily available metal halides known in the art for obtaining the predictable metal halide material characteristics.
Regarding claim 16, Noh in view of Zampetti teaches wherein the electron transport layer is a single-layered structure including the composite (Noh, paragraph 6-7 and Zampetti, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Zampetti teaches wherein the quantum dot comprises a Group II-VI semiconductor compound, a Group III-V semiconductor compound, a Group III-VI semiconductor compound, a Group I-III-VI semiconductor compound, a Group IV-VI semiconductor compound, a Group IV element or compound, or a combination thereof (paragraph 66. For example, InP).
Regarding claim 20, Noh in view of Zampetti teaches an electronic device comprising the light-emitting device of claim 15 (Noh, paragraph 1 and Zampetti, Fig. 1 and paragraph 4).
Claims 11, 13-14, and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh in view of Zampetti and Kim.
Regarding claim 11, Noh teaches a method of manufacturing a light-emitting device, the method comprising: providing a first electrode (an anode) (paragraphs 6-7 and 48); disposing an emission layer (a light emitting layer) on the first electrode (paragraphs 6-7 and 52); applying a mixed composition on the emission layer, wherein the mixed composition comprises: a metal oxide; and a metal halogen compound (a mixture of an electron transporting material, a metal oxide, and a metal halide) (paragraphs 6-7 and 40-41); providing an electron transport layer (an electron transport layer by a solvent processing) (paragraph 43); disposing a second electrode (a cathode) on the electron transport layer to provide a layered structure (paragraphs 6-7 and 49).
Noh does not explicitly teach that 1) the emission layer comprises a quantum dot and 2) the mixed composition comprises an organic solvent and removing the organic solvent from the applied mixed layer composition and 3) the metal halogen is represented by Formula 2 M3(X1)n1 wherein, in Formula 2, M3 is Al, Zn, In, Ga, Ti, or Mg, X1 is independently Cl, Br, or I, and n1 is an integer from 1 to 3.
Regarding 1) the emission layer comprising the quantum dot, Zampetti teaches a light-emitting device (a QD-LED 100), comprising an emission layer (an EML 140) with an electron transport layer (an electron transporting layer 150) directly on the emission layer, wherein the emission layer comprises a quantum dot (140 comprising a quantum dot QD) for obtaining high quantum efficiency (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 1, 55-58, and 64). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Noh with that of Zampetti in order to obtain high quantum efficiency for the light-emitting device.
Regarding 2) the mixed composition comprising the organic solvent and removing the organic solvent from the applied mixed layer composition. Noh teaches a solvent processing of the electron transport layer composition for forming the electron transport layer (paragraph 43). Kim teaches a light-emitting device comprising an electron transport layer composition, wherein the electron transport layer composition including an organic solvent as one of suitable solvents for properly dispersing/forming the electron transport layer composition of a light-emitting device; and removing the organic solvent for forming the electron transport layer (paragraphs 15-24, and 71-72). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Noh with that of Kim in order to properly disperse/form the electron transport layer composition on the emission layer for forming the electron transport layer of the light-emitting device.
Regarding 3) the metal halogen is represented by Formula 2 M3(X1)n1 wherein, in Formula 2, M3 is Al, Zn, In, Ga, Ti, or Mg, X1 is independently Cl, Br, or I, and n1 is an integer from 1 to 3, Noh teaches examples of metal halides include LiF, MgF2, NaF, KF, or the like, which reads on the previously recited Formula 2 (See Noh, paragraph 41 and see the Office Action dated 04/01/2026 rejecting previously submitted claim 15) and the Formula 2 disclosed in the specification of the instant application (See paragraphs 53-55). While the amended claim currently deletes Fluorine “F” from for the Formula 2, the invention does not provide that one specific material (i.e., Cl, Br, or I) among previously recited material choices (i.e., “F, Cl, Br, or I”) is critical over another (i.e., F) for the halogen of the metal halogen. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would recognize that examples of the metal halides from Noh are not limited to LiF, MgF2, NaF, or KF, but also include other readily available metal halides as “the like” from Noh. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize alkaline earth metal halide such as MgCl2 or post-transition metal halide such as ZnCl2 for Formula 2 as readily available metal halides known in the art for obtaining the predictable metal halide material characteristics.
Regarding claim 13, Noh teaches wherein the metal oxide is represented by Formula 1 M11-xM2xOy wherein, in Formula 1, M1 and M2 each independently comprise Zn, Mg, Co, Mn, Y, Al, Ti, Zr, Sn, W, Ta, Ni, Mo, Cu, Ag, In, Nb, Fe, Ce, Sr, Ba, Si, Ga, or a combination thereof, x is 0≤x≤1, and y is 0<y≤5 (paragraph 41, MgO).
Furthermore, while Noh in view of Zampetti and Kim does not explicitly teach what orders of the organic solvent, the metal oxide, and the metal halogen compound are applied for forming the electron transport layer composition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form/mix the electron transporting layer composition including the organic solvent, the metal oxide, and the metal halogen compound in a desired order, including the claimed order of applying the first composition and applying the second composition, as a routine experimentation in the art for providing the same mixture of the electron transport layer composition.
Regarding claim 14, Kim teaches further comprising, after the disposing of the second electrode, heat-treating the first electrode, the emission layer, the electron transport layer, and the second electrode, at about 50° C. to about 250° C (paragraphs 75-77).
Regarding claim 22, Noh in view of Kim teaches wherein the metal oxide is ZnO, TiO2, ZrO2, SnO2, W03, W203, WO2, Ta2NiO, MoO2, MoO3,CuO, Cu2O, ZnMgO, ZnCoO, ZnMnO, ZnSnO, ZnAlO, ZnSiO, ZnYbO, or a combination thereof (Kim, paragraphs 15-24 and 61-66, ZnO); and wherein in the metal halogen compound of Formula 2 M3 is Al, Zn, Ti, or Mg (Noh, paragraph 41 and see the rejection of claim 11 as discussed above).
Regarding claim 23, While Noh in view of Zampetti and Kim does not explicitly teach that M3 in Formula 2 is Al, it is also well known in the art to utilize aluminum halide as a readily available metal halide material. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize various metal halides known in the art such as aluminum halide in order to obtain the predictable metal halide material characteristics.
Regarding claim 24, Kim teaches wherein M1 is Zn, and x is 0≤x≤0.5 (paragraphs 15-24 and 61-66), and an average diameter of the metal oxide is about 1 nanometer to about 50 nanometers (paragraph 65, 1-30 nm).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejections as set forth above in this Office Action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL B WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3418. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8AM-5PM.
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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. 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.
/DANIEL WHALEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights