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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
In chemical patent abstracts for compounds or compositions, the general nature of the compound or composition should be given as well as its use. MPEP 608.01(b)
The instant abstract recites “The present disclosure … relates to an emitting compound of following …” It appears that this description of the inventive compound highlights use of the inventive compound as an emitting material; however, the instant invention as a whole is directed to a compound used as the host of the emitting material layer of an organic light emitting diode (see [0034] and examples in [00386]-[00426]). Thus, the abstract does not provide proper descriptions of the use of the invention. It is suggested to amend the instant abstract to highlight the use of the inventive compound as a host rather than an emitter.
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 4-18 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.
Regarding claim 4, Applicant recites “a first compound represented by Formula 1.” However, Applicant does not provide further limitation of the Formula 1 such as the structural formula of the Formula 1. It is unclear which structural formula the Formula 1 has, rendering this claim indefinite.
For the purpose of prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation to mean that the limitation of the Formula 1 of claim 4 refers to the limitation of the Formula 1 of claim 1.
Regarding claims 5-18, claims 5-18 are rejected due to the dependency from claim 4.
Claims 15-16 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.
Regarding claims 15-16, Applicant recites “the first emitting material part”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of prosecution, the Examiner interprets the limitation to mean “the first emitting part”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 113024529 A, machine translated English version is referred to, hereafter Wang) in view of Kautny et al. (“Oxadiazole based bipolar host materials employing planarized triarylamine donors for RGB PHOLEDs with low efficiency roll-off” J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, vol. 2, page 2069-2081, hereafter Kautny) and Qian et al. (CN 112851649 A, , machine translated English version is referred to, hereafter Qian).
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 10, Wang discloses a compound represented by Formula Lb and used for an organic light emitting diode (page 1, last paragraph through page 2) and exemplifies Compound L090 (page 4).
Wang further discloses an organic light emitting diode comprising a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a light emitting layer (Compound L090 as a host and 5wt% Ir(ppy)3 as a dopant), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al) (Example 15 on page 7-8).
PNG
media_image1.png
410
603
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Compound L090 of Wang has N-phenyl carbazolyl moiety as enclosed by a dashed box in the figure above, wherein the N-phenyl group is not placed on the same plane of the carbazole moiety because there is no ortho-linkage between the ortho carbon of the N-phenyl moiety and the position-1 carbon of the carbazole moiety (i.e. the carbon atoms pointed by arrows in the figure above).
Kautny discloses an indolo[3,2,1-jk]carbazole (hereafter indolocarbazole) compound used as the phosphorescent host of an organic light emitting diode (Abstract). Kautny teaches planarization increases by forming an ortho linkage from N-phenyl carbazole to indolocarbazole (Scheme 2). Kautny teaches increasing planarization and ortho-linkage of a carbazole compound provides improved morphological stability, elevated single and triplet energy values, and reduced efficiency roll-off for the device comprising the compound (paragraph 3 of Conclusion on page 2077; and page 2070, col. 1, par. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
334
829
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Qian discloses a carbazole compound used as the phosphorescent host of an organic light emitting diode (page 1, the last paragraph through page 2, the first paragraph).
Qian teaches that an indolocarbazole is an obvious derivation and an alternative structure of an N-phenyl carbazole (compare Compound 48 with Compound 26 on page 4-5; and see the structures in dashed circles in the figure above).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Compound L090 of Wang by incorporating an ortho-linkage between the ortho carbon of the N-phenyl group and the position-1 carbon of the carbazole group of the compound, as taught by Kautny and Qian.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide increasing planarization, improved morphological stability, elevated single and triplet energy values, and reduced efficiency roll-off for the device comprising the compound based on the teaching of Kautny and Qian.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Substitution of the N-phenyl carbazole moiety with an indolocarbazole moiety in a phosphorescent host compound would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
PNG
media_image3.png
370
716
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The modification provides Compound of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian, which has identical structure as Applicant’s Formula 1, meeting all the limitations of claim 1.
The modification also provides Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian comprising a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a light emitting layer (Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian as a host and 5wt% Ir(ppy)3 as a dopant), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al).
The device has Ir(ppy)3 as the emissive dopant which has the peak emission in a green region, not in a red region; however, Wang does teach a red phosphorescent dopant BtpIr(acac) can be used as the dopant (page 4, line 28).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian by substituting Ir(ppy)3 with a red phosphorescent dopant BtpIr(acac), as taught by Wang.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide an organic light emitting device emitting red light, based on the teaching of Wang.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Substitution of exemplified phosphorescent dopants would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (2) comprising a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a first red emitting material layer (a first Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian as a host and 5wt% BtpIr(acac) as a red phosphorescent dopant), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al), wherein the hole transporting layer, the first red emitting material layer, and the electron transporting layer are a first emitting part, meeting all the limitations of claims 4 and 10.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 113024529 A, machine translated English version is referred to) in view of Kautny et al. (“Oxadiazole based bipolar host materials employing planarized triarylamine donors for RGB PHOLEDs with low efficiency roll-off” J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, vol. 2, page 2069-2081) and Qian et al. (CN 112851649 A, , machine translated English version is referred to) as applied to claims 1, 4, and 10 above, further in view of Li et al. (“Yellow and Red Electrophosphors Based on Linkage Isomers of Phenylisoquinolinyliridium Complexes: Distinct Differences in Photophysical and Electroluminescence Properties” Adv. Func. Mater. 2005, vol. 15, and page 387, hereafter Li).
Regarding claims 5-6, the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (2) reads on all the features of claims 1 and 4 as outlined above.
The device comprises a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a first red emitting material layer (a first Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian as a host and 5wt% BtpIr(acac) as a red phosphorescent dopant), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al).
The red phosphorescent dopant BtpIr(acac) does not have the structure of Applicant’s Formula 3; however, Wang does teach that the phosphorescent dopant material can be an iridium complex (page 4, line 26-28).
Li discloses an Ir complex used as the red phosphorescent dopant of an organic light emitting diode (Abstract, Ir(1-piq)2(acac) in Fig. 1)
PNG
media_image4.png
242
279
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The compound Ir(1-piq)2(acac) has identical structure as Applicant’s Formula 3 and RD1.
Li teaches that the compound provides good emission quantum yield, high brightness, and high external quantum efficiency (page 393, col. 1, under “Conclusion”).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (2) by substituting the red phosphorescent dopant with Ir(1-piq)2(acac), as taught by Wang and Li.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide good emission quantum yield, high brightness, and high external quantum efficiency based on the teaching of Li.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A). Substitution of know red phosphorescent dopants would have been one known element for another known element and would have led to predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The modification provides Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, and Li comprising a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a first red emitting material layer (a first Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian as a host and a second compound, 5wt% Ir(1-piq)2(acac)), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al), wherein the hole transporting layer, the first red emitting material layer, and the electron transporting layer are a first emitting part.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 113024529 A, machine translated English version is referred to) in view of Kautny et al. (“Oxadiazole based bipolar host materials employing planarized triarylamine donors for RGB PHOLEDs with low efficiency roll-off” J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, vol. 2, page 2069-2081) and Qian et al. (CN 112851649 A, , machine translated English version is referred to) and Li et al. (“Yellow and Red Electrophosphors Based on Linkage Isomers of Phenylisoquinolinyliridium Complexes: Distinct Differences in Photophysical and Electroluminescence Properties” Adv. Func. Mater. 2005, vol. 15, and page 387) as applied to claims 1, 4-6, and 10 above, further in view of Lee et al. (US 2006/1013298 A1, hereafter Lee), Nagao et al. (JP 2012/216801, machine translated English version is referred to, hereafter Nagao).
Regarding claims 7-9, the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (2) reads on all the features of claims 1 and 4 as outlined above.
The device comprises a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a first red emitting material layer (a first Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian as a host and a second compound, 5wt% Ir(1-piq)2(acac)), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al), wherein the hole transporting layer, the first red emitting material layer, and the electron transporting layer are a first emitting part.
The emitting material layer comprises a single host Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian comprising carbazole and arylamine moieties.
Lee discloses a light-emitting element (“OLED device”) comprising a light-emitting layer which contains co-host materials and a phosphorescent dopant ([0015], [0028]).
Lee teaches that a first host material comprising carbazole or arylamine has a disadvantage due to crystallization by heat and lower device characteristics ([0030]). Lee teaches that use of the first compound with a second compound including a triazine compound provides prevented crystallization and improved device efficiency ([0031]). Lee teaches mixing ratio of the co-hosts being 1:1 ([0033], Table 1).
Nagao teaches a triazine compound (Compound 13 in [0061]) which can be used as one of co-hosts of an organic emitting device (Example 19 in Table 2). Nagao teaches that the compound of Nagao provides high luminous efficiency and durability ([0008]).
PNG
media_image5.png
248
410
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The Compound 13 of Nagao has identical structure as Applicant’s Formula 5 and the specific embodiment NH3.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian and Li by incorporating Compound 13 of Nagao with mixing ratio of 1:1 in the emitting material layer of the device, as taught by Lee and Nagao.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide prevented crystallization and improved device efficiency based on the teaching of Lee and to provides high luminous efficiency and durability based on the teaching of Nagao.
Furthermore, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The modification provides Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao comprising a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a first red emitting material layer (a first Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%), a second compound Ir(1-piq)2(acac) (5 wt%), and a third Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%)), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al), wherein the hole transporting layer, the first red emitting material layer, and the electron transporting layer are a first emitting part, meeting all the limitations of claims 7-9.
Claims 11-17 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 113024529 A, machine translated English version is referred to) in view of Kautny et al. (“Oxadiazole based bipolar host materials employing planarized triarylamine donors for RGB PHOLEDs with low efficiency roll-off” J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, vol. 2, page 2069-2081) and Qian et al. (CN 112851649 A, machine translated English version is referred to) and Li et al. (“Yellow and Red Electrophosphors Based on Linkage Isomers of Phenylisoquinolinyliridium Complexes: Distinct Differences in Photophysical and Electroluminescence Properties” Adv. Func. Mater. 2005, vol. 15, and page 387), Lee et al. (US 2006/1013298 A1), Nagao et al. (JP 2012/216801, machine translated English version is referred to) as applied to claims 1 and 4-10 above, further in view of Liao et al. (US 2006/0040132 A1, hereafter Liao).
Regarding claims 11-15, 17, and 19-22, Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao reads on all the features of claims 1 and 4-10 as outlined above.
The device comprises a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a hole transporting layer (NPB), a first red emitting material layer (a first Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%), a second compound Ir(1-piq)2(acac) (5 wt%), and a third Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%)), an electron transporting layer (LiF), and a second electrode (Al).
The device is not white light emitting device since there is a single red light emitting material. Wang teaches blue and green phosphorescent dopants FIrpic and Ir(ppy)3 (page 4).
PNG
media_image6.png
683
747
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Liao discloses a tandem white organic light emitting device ([0002], [0008], Figs. 3 and 8) comprising a plurality of white emitting parts (“EL units”) wherein two neighboring emitting parts are separated by a charge generation layer (“connector”). Liao teaches each emitting part can comprise multiple organic layers including a HTL, an emitting material layer layer, an ETL ([0052], Fig. 5). Liao teaches the materials used to construct the white emitting parts can be the same materials as the conventional white OLED from prior arts ([0055]). Liao teaches combination of blue, green, and red layers provide white light ([0047], Fig. 2). Liao teaches an encapsulation layer (“a metal and a sealing substrate”) including such as barium oxide can be formed on top of the second electrode ([0066], [0071]).
Liao teaches that the white OLED of Liao provide high luminance efficiency and high brightness ([0009]).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Organic light emitting device of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao by stacking three emitting parts between the first and the second electrodes, wherein a charge generation layer is disposed in-between two neighboring emitting parts; each emitting part has the same organic layer structure as the Organic light emitting device of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao except that the emitting material layer is a combination of blue, green, and red emitting material layers comprising each a blue, green, and red dopant, respectively; and the second electrode (anode) is sealed by an encapsulation layer, as taught by Liao.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide white light emitting device with high luminance efficiency and high brightness, based on the teaching of Liao.
Moreover, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The modification provides Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao comprising a substrate (glass), an electrode (ITO), a hole transport layer (HTL), an EML, an electron transport layer (ETL), a charge generation layer (CGL), a HTL, an EML, and an ETL, a CGL, a HTL, an EML, an ETL, a second electrode (Al), and an encapsulation layer, wherein each EML is a combination of blue, green, red emitting material layers; each emitting material layer has same host material comprising both Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%) and Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%) except dopants (5 wt%); and the dopants are each a blue dopant (FIrpic), a green dopant (Ir(ppy)3), and a red dopant (Ir(1-piq)2(acac)) in each of blue, green, and red emitting material layers.
The assignments of the claim languages including the first, second, third, and forth are made to match with the claim limitations as follows (Note that the device structure is maintained same, but assignments only are changed).
The Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao is equated with an organic light emitting device comprising a substrate (glass), a first electrode (ITO), a third emitting part (a 3rd HTL, a 3rd EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 3rd ETL), a 2nd CGL, a first emitting part (a 1st HTL, a 1st EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 1st ETL), a 1st CGL, a second emitting part (a 2nd HTL, a 2nd EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 2nd ETL), a second electrode (Al), and an encapsulation layer, wherein each EML is a combination of blue, green, red emitting material layers; each emitting material layer has same co-host materials of Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%) and Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%), except dopants (5 wt%); and the dopants are each a blue dopant (FIrpic), a green dopant (Ir(ppy)3), and a red dopant (Ir(1-piq)2(acac)) in each of blue, green, and red emitting material layers, meeting all the limitations of claims 11-13.
The assignments of the claim languages including the first, second, third, and forth are changed to match with the claim limitations as follows (Note that the device structure is maintained same, but assignments only are changed).
The Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao is equated with an organic light emitting device comprising a substrate (glass), a second electrode (ITO), a third emitting part (a 3rd HTL, a 3rd EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 3rd ETL), a 2nd CGL, a first emitting part (a 1st HTL, a 1st EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 1st ETL), a 1st CGL, a second emitting part (a 2nd HTL, a 2nd EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 2nd ETL), a first electrode (Al), and an encapsulation layer, wherein each EML is a combination of blue, green, red emitting material layers; each emitting material layer has same co-host materials of Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%) and Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%), except dopants (5 wt%); and the dopants are each a blue dopant (FIrpic), a green dopant (Ir(ppy)3), and a red dopant (Ir(1-piq)2(acac)) in each of blue, green, and red emitting material layers, meeting all the limitations of claims 14-15, 17, and 19-22.
Regarding claim 16, the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao reads on all the features of claim 15, as outlined above.
The device comprises a substrate (glass), an electrode (ITO), a hole transport layer (HTL), an EML, an electron transport layer (ETL), a charge generation layer (CGL), a HTL, an EML, and an ETL, a CGL, a HTL, an EML, an ETL, a second electrode (Al), and an encapsulation layer, wherein each EML is a combination of blue, green, red emitting material layers; each emitting material layer has same host material comprising both Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%) and Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%) except dopants (5 wt%); and the dopants are each a blue dopant (FIrpic), a green dopant (Ir(ppy)3), and a red dopant (Ir(1-piq)2(acac)) in each of blue, green, and red emitting material layers.
There are three white emitting parts (i.e. three “EML”) and two charge generation layers (i.e. two CGL) in the device, which does not read on the limitation of claim 16. However, Liao does teach that the number of white emitting parts (“EL unit”) N can be any integer greater than 1 ([0049]) and exemplifies 4 (Fig. 3).
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao by incorporating an additional white emitting parts (i.e. HTL, blue, green, and red emitting material layers, and ETL) to make total four white emitting parts, as taught by Liao.
The motivation of doing so would have been to provide brighter organic light emitting device.
Moreover, the modification would have been a combination of prior art elements according to known material to achieve predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The modification provides Organic light emitting diode of Wang as modified by Kautny, Qian, Li, Lee, and Nagao (2) comprising a substrate (glass), an electrode (ITO), a hole transport layer (HTL), an EML, an electron transport layer (ETL), a charge generation layer (CGL), a HTL, an EML, and an ETL, a HTL, an EML, and an ETL, a CGL, a HTL, an EML, an ETL, a second electrode (Al), and an encapsulation layer, wherein each EML is a combination of blue, green, red emitting material layers; each emitting material layer has same host material comprising both Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%) and Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%) except dopants (5 wt%); and the dopants are each a blue dopant (FIrpic), a green dopant (Ir(ppy)3), and a red dopant (Ir(1-piq)2(acac)) in each of blue, green, and red emitting material layers.
In the device the second and the third emitting parts are equated with a first emitting part. Additionally, the layer containing Ir(ppy)3 as a dopant can be equated with a yellow-green layer or a green layer. None of the instant claims specifies how much intensity of yellow and green light are required and how broad spectra and which maximum wavelengths are required to be the yellow and green light. The Ir(ppy)3 has broad emission spectrum such that a portion of light includes yellow light such that the layer containing Ir(ppy)3 can be interpreted as a yellow-green emitting layer or a green emitting layer.
The device is equated with an organic light emitting device comprising a substrate (glass), a second electrode (ITO), a third emitting part (a 3rd HTL, a 3rd EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 3rd ETL), a 2nd CGL, a first emitting part (a 1st HTL, an EML (a blue layer, a green emitting layer, and a red layer), an ETL, a CGL, a HTL, a EML (a blue layer, a yellow-green emitting layer, and a first red emitting layer), a 1st ETL), a 1st CGL, a second emitting part (a 2nd HTL, a 2nd EML (blue, green, and red layers), a 2nd ETL), a first electrode (Al), and an encapsulation layer, wherein each EML is a combination of blue, green, red emitting material layers; each emitting material layer has same co-host materials of Compound Wang as modified by Kautny and Qian (45 wt%) and Compound 13 of Nagao (45 wt%), except dopants (5 wt%); and the dopants are each a blue dopant (FIrpic), a green dopant (Ir(ppy)3), and a red dopant (Ir(1-piq)2(acac)) in each of blue, green, and red emitting material layers.
Claim Objections / Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As outlined above, Wang (CN 113024529 A) in view of Kautny (J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, vol. 2, page 2069-2081) and Qian (CN 112851649 A) is a representation of the closest prior arts. As described in more detail above, Wang in view of Kautny and Qian teaches an amine compound substituted by a condensed heterocycle used as the host material of an organic light emitting diode; however, Wang in view of Kautny and Qian does not teach that the specific structural formula as required in the instant claim 2 or the specific embodiments as required in the instant claims 3 or 23.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEOKMIN JEON whose telephone number is (571)272-4599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am to 5:00pm EST.
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.
/SEOKMIN JEON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights