CTNF 18/595,603 CTNF 97628 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Statu s 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. IDS The IDS document(s) filed on 03/05/2024 have been considered. Copies of the PTO-1449 documents are herewith enclosed with this office action. Drawing Objections 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the recitation of “an emission layer, a first layer, a second layer” (see claim 1), “a third layer” (see claim 7), “the hole transport region comprises at least one of a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an emission auxiliary layer, and an electron blocking layer, the electron transport region comprises at least one of a hole blocking layer, an electron transport layer, and an electron injection layer, and the electron transport region comprises the first layer, the second layer, and the third layer” (see claim 8) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation of “an electron injection layer” should state “ the electron injection layer” due to the dependency of claim 8 . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Han et al. (US 2017/0186981 A1), hereafter “Han” . As to claim 1, Han teaches a light-emitting device comprising: a first electrode (Fig. 1, 110, ⁋ [0046]); a second electrode facing the first electrode (190); and an interlayer (150) arranged between the first electrode and the second electrode and comprising an emission layer (⁋ [0052], “The organic layer 150 may include an emission layer”), wherein the interlayer further comprises: a first layer (⁋ [0036], “the first layer may be in direct contact with the second electrode”) arranged between the emission layer and the second electrode; and a second layer (⁋ [0036], “the second layer may be disposed between the first layer and the emission layer”) arranged between the first layer and the emission layer, the first layer comprises a first metal-containing material (⁋ [0030], The first layer may include two components selected from the first component… “; ⁋ [0016] shows various combinations of Li) the second layer comprises a second metal-containing material and a metal-free material (⁋ [0030], The second layer may include one component or two components selected from...the second component… “; ⁋ [0017] shows various metal complexes, such as Li, which may include phenanthroline), and a difference between a work function (W/F) of the first layer and a work function (W/F) of the second layer is in a range of about 0.05 eV to about 0.2 eV (the materials are the same as the instant application, accordingly, the difference between a W/F of the first layer and a W/F of the second layer is within the range). As to claim 2, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein an absolute value of the W/F of the first layer is in a range of about 2.5 eV to about 2.9 eV (the materials are the same as the instant application, accordingly, the absolute value of the W/F of the first layer is within range). As to claim 3, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein an absolute value of the W/F of the second layer is in a range of about 2.4 eV to about 3.0 eV (the materials are the same as the instant application, accordingly, the absolute value of the W/F of the first layer is within range). As to claim 12, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein the first metal-containing material and the second metal-containing material each independently include ytterbium (Yb), lithium (Li), copper (Cu), silver (Ag), gold (Au), aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), or a combination thereof (see claim 1). As to claim 13, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein the metal-free material comprises a phenanthroline-based compound (see claim 1), a triazine-based compound, or a combination thereof. As to claim 15, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein the first layer directly contacts the second layer (⁋ [0036], “the first layer may be in direct contact with the second layer”) . Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4-9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han . As to claim 4, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein a ratio of a thickness of the first layer to a thickness of the second layer is in a range of about 1:2 to about 1:25 (⁋ [0037], “5 Å to about 300 Å”). Examiner notes that if both the first layer and second layer had the same thickness the ratio would be 1:1, and at their biggest difference of thickness, wherein the first layer is 5 Å and the second layer is 300 Å, the ratio would be 1:60 resulting in a ratio of thickness witin a range of 1:1 to 1:60. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ 2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05. As to claim 5, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the first layer is in a range of about 4 Å to about 20 Å (⁋ [0037], “5 Å to about 300 Å”). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ 2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05. As to claim 6, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the second layer is in a range of about 10 Å to about 500 Å (⁋ [0037], “5 Å to about 300 Å”). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ 2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05. As to claim 7, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, and further teaches a third layer ⁋ [0039]) but fails to teach all the limitations of wherein the interlayer further comprises a third layer arranged between the emission layer and the second layer, and the third layer comprises a second metal-free material. Examiner notes, however, that a duplication of the second layer satisfies the claim language as it pertains to the third layer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate the second layer, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. As to claim 8, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 7, wherein the first electrode is an anode (⁋ [0049]), the second electrode is a cathode (⁋ [0235]), the interlayer further comprises: a hole transport region (⁋ [0053]) arranged between the first electrode and the emission layer; and an electron transport region (157, ⁋ [0053]) arranged between the emission layer and the second electrode, the hole transport region comprises at least one of a hole injection layer, a hole transport layer, an emission auxiliary layer, and an electron blocking layer (⁋ [0055]), the electron transport region comprises at least one of a hole blocking layer, an electron transport layer, and an electron injection layer (⁋ [0187]), and the electron transport region comprises the first layer, the second layer, and the third layer (⁋ [0039], “the electron injection layer may include a first layer, a second layer, and a third layer”). As to claim 9, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 8, wherein the electron transport region comprises an electron injection layer, and the electron injection layer comprises the first layer and the second layer (⁋ [0039], “the electron injection layer may include a first layer, a second layer, and a third layer”). As to claim 14, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein an amount of the metal-free material in the second layer is in a range of about 95.0 parts by weight to about 99.9 parts by weight, based on a total of 100 parts by weight of the metal-free material and the second metal-containing material. On the other hand, Examiner notes the Applicant has not specified a criticality to the dimensions. If the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device: In re Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 220 USPQ 777 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han, and further in view of Seo et al. (CN 105679950 B), English translation provided, hereafter “Seo” . As to claim 10, Han teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, and teaches a light-emitting unit (150), but fails to teach wherein the interlayer further comprises m light-emitting units and m-1 charge generation unit(s) between neighboring ones of the m light-emitting units, m is an integer greater than or equal to 2, and one of the m light-emitting units comprises the emission layer, the first layer, and the second layer. Seo teaches a similar light emitting device (100, Page 6, Par. 9), with 2 light emitting units (Fig. 2, ST1+ST2, Page 10, Par. 2), and 1 charge generation unit (160). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of the light emitting units and charge generation unit as taught by Seo into the device of Han for the purpose of the organic light emitting display device having a plurality of emission layer can further improve the luminous efficiency and reduce the operating voltage (Page 10, Par. 5). Additionally, the combination of Han and Seo teach the limitation “one of the m light-emitting units comprises the emission layer, the first layer, and the second layer” due to Han’s light-emitting unit comprising of the emission layer, the first layer, and the second layer being modified within one of Seo’s light-emitting units. As to claim 11, Han modified by Seo teaches the light-emitting device of claim 10, Seo teaches wherein a maximum emission wavelength of light emitted from one of the m light- emitting units (Page 10, Par. 3, “may be a blue emitting layer”) and a maximum emission wavelength of light emitted from another one of the m light-emitting units (Page 10, Par. 4, “a yellow emission layer”) are different from each other . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han, and further in view of Shin et al. (US 2022/0173343 A1), hereafter “Shin” . As to claim 16, Han fails to teach an electronic apparatus comprising the light-emitting device of claim 1. Shin teaches a similar light emitting device (Fig. 1, 10, ⁋ [0070]) within an electronic apparatus (⁋ [0221]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of an electronic apparatus as taught by Shin with the device of Han for the purpose of applying the electronic apparatus to various displays (⁋ [0230]). As to claim 17, Han modified by Shin teaches the electronic apparatus of claim 16, Shin teaches further comprising: 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 at least one of the source electrode and the drain electrode of the thin-film transistor (⁋ [0227]). As to claim 18, Han modified by Shin teaches the electronic apparatus of claim 17, Shin teaches further comprising: at least one of a color filter, a color conversion layer, a touch screen layer, and a polarizing layer (⁋⁋ [0222]-[0229]). As to claim 19, Han fails to teach an electronic device comprising the light-emitting device of claim 1. Shin teaches a similar light emitting device (Fig. 1, 10, ⁋ [0070]) within an electronic apparatus (⁋ [0221]), wherein the electronic apparatus is used in various display devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of the electronic device as taught by Shin with the device of Han to improve the performance of the display devices. As to claim 20, Han modified by Shin teaches the electronic device of claim 19, Shin further teaches wherein the electronic device is a flat panel display, a curved display, a computer monitor, a medical monitor, a television, a billboard, an indoor light, an outdoor light, a signal light, a head-up display, a fully transparent display, a partially transparent display, a flexible display, a rollable display, a foldable display, a stretchable display, a laser printer, a telephone, a mobile phone, a tablet personal computer, a phablet, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a wearable device, a laptop computer, a digital camera, a camcorder, a viewfinder, a micro display, a three-dimensional (3D) display, a virtual reality display, an augmented reality display, a vehicle, a video wall with multiple displays tiled together, a theater screen, a stadium screen, a phototherapy device, or a signboard (⁋ [0230] “digital cameras”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARNELL HUNTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1796. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30pm. 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 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. /CARNELL HUNTER III/ Examiner, Art Unit 2893 /SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 2 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 3 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 4 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 5 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 6 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 7 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 8 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 9 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 18/595,603 Page 10 Art Unit: 2893
Prosecution Insights