DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 4/14/2026.
Currently, claims 1-2, 5-18 and 20 are pending. Claims 3-4 and 19 have been canceled.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In para. [0039] of the amended specification, reference numeral “32” is used to designate the third hole blocking layer. However, elsewhere, “32” is used to designate the first hole blocking layer and “34” is used to designate the third hole blocking layer. Similarly, in para. [0039], “34” is used to designate the first hole blocking layer. However, elsewhere, “32” is used to designate the first hole blocking layer and “34” is used to designate the third hole blocking layer.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because the limitation “wherein n is an integer greater than 1” (lines 5-6) is superfluous in light of the amendment. Claim 1 has been amended to recite “wherein n is greater than 2” (line 14). In the case that n is greater than 2, then of course n is greater than 1. The Examiner suggests amending the limitation in lines 5-6 to recite “wherein n is an integer greater than 2” and to delete the limitation “wherein n is greater than 2” in line 14.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 5-18 and 20 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.
Claim 1 recites “except for the electron transport layer in the first light-emitting functional layer closest to the cathode” at the end of the claim. It is not clear to what this refers, particularly considering that the preceding limitation is “wherein the thicknesses of the electron transport layers in the remaining light-emitting functional layers of the n light-emitting functional layers except for the first light-emitting functional layer are the same” and there is another limitation that “a thickness of an electron transport layer in a first light-emitting functional layer closest to the cathode among n light-emitting functional layers is greater than each of thicknesses of electron transport layers in remaining light-emitting functional layers of the n light-emitting functional layers except for the first light-emitting functional layer”. With these relationships already claimed, it is not clear to what “except for the electron transport layer in the first light-emitting functional layer closest to the cathode” at the end of claim 1 refers.
Claims 2, 5-18 and 20 recite the same limitation via dependency.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL M LUKE whose telephone number is (571)270-1569. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, 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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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.
/DANIEL LUKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights