US 8723164

Here is a concise summary of US Patent 8723164:

US Patent 8723164: Electronic Device

• Title: Electronic device
• Current Assignee: Pictiva Displays International Ltd
• Inventors: Guenter Schmid, Ralf Krause, Stefan Seidel, Oliver Weiss, Christoph Gaerditz, Riikka Suhonen, Ulrich Niedermeier, Fryderyk Kozlowski
• Filing Date: 2009-05-18
• Issue Date: 2014-05-13
• Abstract: An electronic device is described, which includes a substrate, a first electrode, at least one organic functional layer, and a second electrode. The organic functional layer is positioned between the two electrodes and contains at least a first, a second, and a third matrix material. A key feature is that the first matrix material has a larger band gap compared to both the second and third matrix materials.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1: This claim describes an electronic device comprising a substrate, a first electrode, at least one organic functional layer, and a second electrode. The organic functional layer is located between the electrodes and contains three matrix materials (first, second, and third). The third matrix material has a Lowest Unoccupied Molecular Orbital (LUMO) that is energetically lower than the LUMOs of the first and second matrix materials. The second matrix material has a Highest Occupied Molecular Orbital (HOMO) that is energetically higher than the HOMOs of the first and third matrix materials. Crucially, this organic functional layer is specifically an emission layer that is doped with at least one emitter material.

• Claim 15: This claim also describes an electronic device with the same basic structure and matrix material energy level relationships as Claim 1. However, it adds a specific characteristic for the first matrix material: its LUMO is energetically higher than the LUMOs of both the second and third matrix materials, and its HOMO is energetically lower than the HOMOs of both the second and third matrix materials.

• Claim 16: Similar to Claim 15, this claim also describes an electronic device with the same fundamental structure and matrix material energy level relationships as Claim 1. The distinguishing feature here is that the first matrix material has a charge carrier mobility that is lower than the charge carrier mobilities of both the second and third matrix materials.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
As of April 26, 2026, patent US8723164 is involved in litigation at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit under case number 26-1599. No other specific 2026 CAFC dockets for this patent were found.

Here is a list of known litigation involving US patent 8723164, based on the provided patent text and associated links:

• PTAB Inter Partes Review (IPR)

  • Case Number: IPR2024-01093
  • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
  • Filing Date: June 28, 2024
  • Plaintiff(s) (Patent Owner): PICTIVA DISPLAYS INTERNATIONAL LTD.
  • Defendant(s) (Petitioner): SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., AND SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Final Written Decision (status as of 2026-07-08, indicating the case is concluded or near conclusion).

• District Court Case (Texas Eastern District Court)

  • Case Number: 2:24-cv-00532
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation (active).

• District Court Case (Texas Eastern District Court)

  • Case Number: 2:23-cv-00495
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation (active).

• Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Case

  • Case Number: 26-1599
  • Jurisdiction: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly provided in the patent text summary.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation (active).

The patent text also indicates "First worldwide family litigation filed", linking to Darts-ip, which suggests broader international litigation related to the patent family but does not provide specific details for US patent 8723164 itself within the provided text. Due to the explicit instruction to focus on US patent 8723164 and the given current date of April 26, 2026, details for these broader family litigations are not provided unless directly tied to the US patent.

Proceedings overview

There is one active AIA trial proceeding on US patent 8723164. This Inter Partes Review (IPR) is currently in the institution phase, meaning no claims have been invalidated or sustained, and the patent's defensive posture remains largely unchanged at this moment.

IPR2024-01093 — Samsung Display Co., Ltd., [Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.), and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Pictiva Displays International Ltd.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2024-06-28
• Status: Institution Decision Due. The PTAB has not yet decided whether to institute a trial. (Note: The Google Patents "Legal Status" section incorrectly states "filed (Final Written Decision)"; the Unified Patents portal, linked by Google Patents, indicates the proceeding is awaiting an institution decision.)
• Judge panel: Not yet publicly available, as the panel is typically assigned upon institution of the trial.
• Petition grounds: Challenges have been filed against claims 1-6, 10, 15, and 16. The specific prior art references and statutory bases (§ 102 for novelty or § 103 for obviousness) are detailed in the filed petition, which is accessible via the USPTO PTAB E2E system.
• Institution decision: Not yet issued. The statutory deadline for the PTAB to issue a decision on institution is approximately six months from the filing date, which would be around December 28, 2024.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not applicable, as the institution decision has not yet been issued.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable at this stage.
• Appeal: Not applicable at this stage.
• Defensive value: This IPR is pending, challenging multiple claims of US8723164. A defendant currently facing assertion of this patent should closely monitor this proceeding. If the PTAB institutes the IPR, these claims will undergo a full trial, potentially leading to their cancellation. If institution is denied, it would indicate that the petitioner's initial arguments did not meet the institution threshold, potentially strengthening the patent owner's position against similar prior art challenges by the petitioner and its privies.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US patent 8723164 (claims 1-16) remain untried and unadjudicated by a Final Written Decision in an AIA trial proceeding. One Inter Partes Review, IPR2024-01093, has been filed by Samsung Display Co., Ltd., et al., challenging claims 1-6, 10, 15, and 16. This proceeding is in its nascent stages, with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) yet to issue a decision on whether to institute the trial. Therefore, at this time, no claims have been canceled or confirmed patentable through a PTAB trial.

The estoppel landscape remains largely open. Claims 7-9, 11-14 of US8723164 are not currently challenged in IPR2024-01093 and thus remain entirely untested by PTAB review. For the challenged claims (1-6, 10, 15, 16), if the PTAB institutes the IPR and subsequently issues a Final Written Decision, the petitioner (Samsung Display Co., Ltd., et al.) and its privies would be statutorily estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) from asserting in future district court litigation or other USPTO proceedings any ground that was raised or reasonably could have been raised during the IPR. The fact that Samsung Display Co., Ltd., et al. has filed this IPR suggests active commercial interest in this patent, possibly due to ongoing or anticipated litigation.

Recommended next steps

Given the pending IPR2024-01093, a defendant should take the following steps:

• Monitor the Institution Decision: The most immediate and critical milestone is the PTAB's decision on whether to institute IPR2024-01093. This decision is expected around December 28, 2024. A grant of institution would indicate that Samsung Display Co., Ltd., et al. has demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one challenged claim, making claims 1-6, 10, 15, and 16 particularly vulnerable.
• Review the Petition: It is crucial to obtain and thoroughly review the full IPR petition for IPR2024-01093. This will provide detailed insight into the specific prior art and legal arguments (e.g., novelty under § 102, obviousness under § 103) being used to challenge claims 1-6, 10, 15, and 16. The petition is available on the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board End-to-End (PTAB E2E) system via the case link: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2024-01093.
• Analyze Unchallenged Claims: Claims 7-9, 11-14 are not included in IPR2024-01093. A defendant should analyze the strength and scope of these claims in light of potential infringement theories and available prior art to determine if they present a viable target for a separate IPR challenge, should circumstances warrant.
• Assess Impact on Litigation Strategy: The pendency of this IPR impacts any ongoing or potential litigation involving US8723164. Depending on the institution decision and ultimate outcome, it could significantly alter the strength of the patent and the claims available for assertion.

Inventors

• Guenter Schmid
• Ralf Krause
• Stefan Seidel
• Oliver Weiss
• Christoph Gaerditz
• Riikka Suhonen
• Ulrich Niedermeier
• Fryderyk Kozlowski

Employer at the time of filing: Osram Opto Semiconductors GmbH. No unusual patterns are immediately apparent from the provided data.

Original assignee

Osram Opto Semiconductors GmbH.
Based on the patent's subject matter (electronic devices, specifically OLEDs), Osram Opto Semiconductors GmbH is an operating company that manufactures and ships products embodying the claims. Their primary line of business is opto-semiconductors, including LEDs and OLEDs. Osram Opto Semiconductors GmbH is currently an operating company.

Assignment timeline

• 2011-02-18 (executed) / recorded 2011-02-18 — Reel 025832/0196

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: KOZLOWSKI, FRYDERYK; WEISS, OLIVER; NIEDERMEIER, ULRICH; SEIDEL, STEFAN; GAERDITZ, CHRISTOPH; KRAUSE, RALF; SCHMID, GUENTER; SUHONEN, RUEKKA (inventors)
  • Assignee: OSRAM OPTO SEMICONDUCTORS GMBH
  • Correspondent: MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP, 600 13TH STREET NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20005
  • Context: Transfer of inventor interests to the original assignee.

• 2015-12-16 (executed) / recorded 2016-01-21 — Reel 037567/0993

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: OSRAM OPTO SEMICONDUCTORS GMBH
  • Assignee: OSRAM OLED GMBH
  • Correspondent: MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP, 600 13TH STREET NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20005. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Internal reorganization within the Osram group.

• 2023-10-17 (executed) / recorded 2024-02-06 — Reel 066394/0251

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: OSRAM OLED GMBH
  • Assignee: PICTIVA DISPLAYS INTERNATIONAL LTD.
  • Correspondent: MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP, 600 13TH STREET NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20005. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer-to-asserter.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8723164
    2008 : Priority date
    2009 : Application filed by Osram Opto
    2011 : Inventor assignment to Osram Opto
    2014 : Patent granted
    2016 : Assigned to Osram OLED GmbH
    2024 : Assigned to Pictiva Displays Intl Ltd

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — present. The assignment from Osram OLED GmbH to Pictiva Displays International Ltd. (executed 2023-10-17, recorded 2024-02-06, Reel 066394/0251) suggests a shell-entity transfer. Pictiva Displays International Ltd. does not appear to be an operating company producing products, and its name structure "Displays International Ltd." is consistent with a licensing entity. Unified Patents has also flagged Pictiva Displays International Ltd. in litigation.

2. Known asserter in the chain — present. Pictiva Displays International Ltd. is identified as a petitioner in an IPR case (IPR2024-01093) by Unified Patents, indicating it is an asserting entity. They are also listed in district court litigation in the Eastern District of Texas.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. McDermott Will & Emery LLP is listed as the correspondent for all three recorded assignments (Reel 025832/0196, Reel 037567/0993, and Reel 066394/0251). This consistent use of the same legal firm across transfers, including the transfer to an NPE, is a strong signal.

4. Cascading transfers — not present. There are three assignments spread out over several years, not multiple consecutive transfers within a short period.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — present. The assignment to Pictiva Displays International Ltd. was executed on 2023-10-17 and recorded on 2024-02-06 (Reel 066394/0251). Unified Patents reports litigation filed by Pictiva in the Eastern District of Texas in July 2023 (2:23-cv-00495) and October 2023 (2:24-cv-00532), and another IPR in June 2024. The October 2023 filing is subsequent to the execution date of the assignment, and the earlier July 2023 filing precedes the execution of the assignment, suggesting Pictiva was already active in assertion around the time of the transfer.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. The original assignee, Osram Opto Semiconductors GmbH, and its subsequent entity, Osram OLED GmbH, are not reported to be in bankruptcy.

7. Privateering — unclear. While the patent moved from an operating company to an asserting entity, the available data does not explicitly state whether Osram Opto Semiconductors GmbH or Osram OLED GmbH are directly benefiting from Pictiva's assertions against competitors. More in-depth financial or legal filings would be needed to confirm privateering.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain ends at Pictiva Displays International Ltd., which is an asserting entity, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. This verdict is driven by multiple strong signals. The transfer to Pictiva Displays International Ltd. (executed 2023-10-17, recorded 2024-02-06, Reel 066394/0251) is a shell-entity transfer to a known asserting entity. Furthermore, the same correspondent, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, is present across all recorded assignments, including the transfer to Pictiva. The initiation of litigation by Pictiva in July 2023 and October 2023, around the time of the assignment, also indicates a pre-litigation transfer pattern.

For verification, see the USPTO Assignment Center search page: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/ (search for patent number 8723164).

I have analyzed the provided patent text for US8723164 to identify the most relevant prior art as indicated in its "Patent Citations" and "Non-Patent Citations" sections. The priority date for US8723164 is May 30, 2008. Any reference published or filed before this date can serve as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

The independent claims of US8723164 (Claims 1, 15, 16, and method claim 13) generally describe an electronic device with an organic functional layer containing at least a first, second, and third matrix material. These materials are characterized by specific Lowest Unoccupied Molecular Orbital (LUMO) and Highest Occupied Molecular Orbital (HOMO) energy level relationships designed to improve charge carrier transport and balance. Specifically, the third matrix material has a LUMO lower than the second and first, and the second matrix material has a HOMO higher than the first and third. Claim 1 specifies this organic functional layer as an emission layer doped with at least one emitter material.

Below is an analysis of the cited prior art, including full citation, publication/filing date, a brief description (based on the title), and a potential anticipation assessment. Please note that the anticipation assessment is potential as it is based solely on the titles and general subject matter, without access to the full text of each cited reference.

Prior Art Citations for US8723164

Patent Citations

1. Full Citation: JP2002313583A - Semiconductor Energy Lab Co Ltd, "Light emitting device"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2002-10-25; Priority: 2000-12-28
   • Brief Description: Concerns a general light-emitting device.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): The title is very broad ("Light emitting device") and does not specifically disclose the use of three matrix materials with the defined HOMO/LUMO relationships for an organic functional layer. It potentially anticipates the general concept of a light-emitting device (e.g., as covered by claim 11 or 12) but not the specific matrix material composition of claims 1, 15, or 16.

2. Full Citation: TW543342B - Semiconductor Energy Lab, "Luminescent device having an organic luminescent element"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2003-07-21; Priority: 2000-12-28
   • Brief Description: Describes a luminescent device incorporating an organic luminescent element.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to JP2002313583A, this title is broad and indicates a device with an organic luminescent element. It potentially anticipates generic aspects of organic light-emitting devices (claims 11, 12) but lacks specificity regarding multiple matrix materials and their energy levels as claimed in US8723164.

3. Full Citation: JP2002260861A - Eastman Kodak Co, "Organic light emitting devices"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2002-09-13; Priority: 2001-01-02
   • Brief Description: Concerns organic light-emitting devices.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): A generic title for organic light-emitting devices. It may anticipate the general field of the invention but not the specific structural features of the matrix materials as defined in claims 1, 15, or 16.

4. Full Citation: US20020101154A1 - Satoshi Seo, "Organic light emitting element and display device using the element"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2002-08-01; Priority: 2001-02-01
   • Brief Description: Describes an organic light-emitting element and its use in a display device.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference describes a fundamental component (OLED element) and its application. It potentially anticipates the broad scope of an electronic device as an OLED (claim 12), but without more detail, it's unlikely to anticipate the specific multi-matrix layer composition of claims 1, 15, or 16.

5. Full Citation: JP2002305085A - Semiconductor Energy Lab Co Ltd, "Organic light emitting device and display device using the same"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2002-10-18; Priority: 2001-02-01
   • Brief Description: Pertains to an organic light-emitting device and a display device utilizing it.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to previous broad OLED patents, it potentially anticipates the general electronic device and OLED application (claim 12) but not the specific details of the matrix materials' energy levels.

6. Full Citation: WO2002074015A2 - The Trustees Of Princeton University, "Materials and devices for blue phosphorescence based organic light emitting diodes"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2002-09-19; Priority: 2001-03-14
   • Brief Description: Focuses on materials and devices for blue phosphorescent organic light-emitting diodes.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This title is more specific, mentioning "materials" and "blue phosphorescence based OLEDs," which relates to the emitter material aspect of US8723164. While it might describe various host materials, it's unlikely to explicitly disclose the three-matrix system with the precise HOMO/LUMO requirements for charge balance as in claims 1, 15, or 16 without further information.

7. Full Citation: JP2004526284A - The Trustees Of Princeton University, "Materials and devices for blue phosphorescence based on organic light emitting diodes"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2004-08-26; Priority: 2001-03-14
   • Brief Description: Japanese counterpart to WO2002074015A2, concerning materials and devices for blue phosphorescent organic light-emitting diodes.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Same assessment as WO2002074015A2.

8. Full Citation: JP2005514754A - The Trustees Of Princeton University, "White light emitting OLED derived from monomer and aggregate composite light emission"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2005-05-19; Priority: 2001-12-28
   • Brief Description: Describes white light-emitting OLEDs using a composite light emission from monomers and aggregates.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is specific to white OLEDs and the emission mechanism. It may detail host materials. It potentially anticipates devices with multiple emitter types (as briefly mentioned in US8723164's description) but the title does not indicate the specific three-matrix host system with defined energy levels for charge transport as claimed.

9. Full Citation: JP2005108726A - Sanyo Electric Co Ltd, "Organic electroluminescent device and organic compound for organic electroluminescent device"

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2005-04-21; Priority: 2003-09-30
   • Brief Description: Relates to an organic electroluminescent device and specific organic compounds for use therein.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This suggests new organic compounds for OLEDs. It might disclose various host materials or charge transport materials. If it describes a combination of materials performing roles similar to the three matrix materials with the specified energy level alignment, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 15, or 16. However, the title alone is insufficient to confirm this.

10. Full Citation: JP2005108727A - Sanyo Electric Co Ltd, "Organic electroluminescent device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2005-04-21; Priority: 2003-09-30
    • Brief Description: Concerns an organic electroluminescent device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): A generic OLED patent, similar to earlier broad citations.

11. Full Citation: JP2006128636A - Fuji Photo Film Co Ltd, "Organic electroluminescence device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006-05-18; Priority: 2004-09-29
    • Brief Description: Refers to an organic electroluminescence device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Another generic OLED patent.

12. Full Citation: US20060068223A1 - Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd., "Organic electroluminescent element"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006-03-30; Priority: 2004-09-29
    • Brief Description: Describes an organic electroluminescent element.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Generic OLED element.

13. Full Citation: WO2006038020A1 - Cambridge Display Technology Limited, "Light emitting device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006-04-13; Priority: 2004-10-08
    • Brief Description: Concerns a general light-emitting device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Generic light-emitting device.

14. Full Citation: JP2006165525A - Au Optronics Corp, "Phosphorescent organic light emitting device, homogeneous structure, and method for improving operation efficiency of phosphorescent organic light emitting device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006-06-22; Priority: 2004-12-09
    • Brief Description: Focuses on phosphorescent OLEDs, including homogeneous structures and methods for improving efficiency.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is more relevant due to its focus on "improving operation efficiency" in phosphorescent OLEDs, which is a goal of US8723164 through charge carrier balance. It may disclose mixed host systems. If it teaches a host composition with three materials having similar energy level relationships for improved efficiency, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 15, 16, and possibly 13 (method of improving efficiency).

15. Full Citation: JP2006228936A - Fuji Photo Film Co Ltd, "Organic electroluminescence device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006-08-31; Priority: 2005-02-17
    • Brief Description: Relates to an organic electroluminescence device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Generic OLED patent.

16. Full Citation: WO2007070257A1 - Eastman Kodak Company, "Electroluminescent host material"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2007-06-21; Priority: 2005-12-14
    • Brief Description: Focuses on an electroluminescent host material.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This is highly relevant as US8723164 explicitly deals with a matrix material (which acts as a host) with specific characteristics. If this reference discloses a host material composed of multiple components, especially three with the defined energy levels for charge transport, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 15, or 16.

17. Full Citation: TW200746898A - Eastman Kodak Co, "Electroluminescent devices including organic EIL layer"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2007-12-16; Priority: 2006-04-27
    • Brief Description: Describes electroluminescent devices that include an organic Electron Injection Layer (EIL).
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference focuses on EILs, which are organic functional layers mentioned in US8723164's description. If the EIL itself is described as having three matrix materials with the specified energy level properties to optimize electron injection or transport, it could potentially anticipate claims related to such functional layers (e.g., claim 7, and potentially claim 1 if the EIL is also an emission layer or if the principle is generally applicable).

18. Full Citation: WO2007127063A2 - Eastman Kodak Company, "Electroluminescent devices including organic eil layer"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2007-11-08; Priority: 2006-04-27
    • Brief Description: International counterpart to TW200746898A, concerning electroluminescent devices with organic EIL layers.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Same assessment as TW200746898A.

19. Full Citation: WO2008010915A2 - Eastman Kodak Company, "Light emitting device containing phosphorescent complex"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2008-01-24; Priority: 2006-07-18
    • Brief Description: Describes a light-emitting device that includes a phosphorescent complex.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This is relevant as US8723164 discusses combining phosphorescent and fluorescent emitter materials. The patent likely describes host materials suitable for phosphorescent emitters. If a multi-component host system with the specific three matrix materials and their energy level alignment is disclosed to improve phosphorescent device efficiency, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 15, or 16.

20. Full Citation: US20080074038A1 - Hee-Kyung Kim, "Organic light emitting display (OLED) and its method of manufacture"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2008-03-27; Priority: 2006-09-26
    • Brief Description: Concerns an OLED and a method for its manufacture.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference covers both an OLED device and a manufacturing method, making it potentially relevant to claims 1-12 and 13-14. If its method of manufacture involves simultaneous application of three matrix materials with defined energy levels for charge balance, it could potentially anticipate method claims 13 and 14, as well as the device claims.

21. Full Citation: JP2010510675A - クゥアルコム・インコーポレイテッド (Qualcomm Incorporated), "Associative memory"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2010-04-02; Priority: 2006-11-17
    • Brief Description: Describes an associative memory device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent appears to be an outlier. Its subject matter ("Associative memory") is completely unrelated to organic light-emitting devices, solar cells, or transistors as described in US8723164. Therefore, it is highly unlikely to anticipate any claims of US8723164. This might be a citation error or for a very tangential, non-technical reason.

22. Full Citation: US20080116536A1 - Forrest Stephen R, "Organic hybrid planar-nanocrystalline bulk heterojunctions"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2008-05-22; Priority: 2006-11-20
    • Brief Description: Relates to organic hybrid planar-nanocrystalline bulk heterojunctions, potentially relevant to solar cells.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent, with its focus on "bulk heterojunctions," is highly relevant to organic solar cells, which are listed as an embodiment of the electronic device in US8723164 (claim 12). If the heterojunction layer itself functions as an organic functional layer comprising three materials with the specified HOMO/LUMO relationships for charge transport, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 7, 12, 15, or 16 in the context of solar cells. Its publication date (2008-05-22) is very close to the priority date of US8723164 (2008-05-30), making it very strong prior art if the content is similar.

23. Full Citation: WO2008065975A1 - Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd., "Light-emitting device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2008-06-05; Priority: 2006-11-30
    • Brief Description: Concerns a general light-emitting device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Generic light-emitting device. Its publication date is after the priority date of US8723164, but its priority date (2006-11-30) is earlier, making it valid prior art.

24. Full Citation: US20090039294A1 - Osram Opto Semiconductors Gmbh, "Radiation emitting device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2009-02-12; Priority: 2007-08-07
    • Brief Description: Describes a radiation-emitting device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is from the same original assignee as US8723164. Its publication date is after the priority date of US8723164, but its priority date (2007-08-07) is earlier, making it valid prior art. Given the shared assignee and similar subject matter ("Radiation emitting device"), it is highly likely to be very relevant. It could potentially anticipate claims 1, 11, or 12, and potentially the specific matrix material composition if it represents earlier work by the same entity on improving OLED efficiency.

25. Full Citation: DE102007053396A1 - Osram Opto Semiconductors Gmbh, "Radiation-emitting device"

    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2009-02-12; Priority: 2007-08-07
    • Brief Description: German counterpart to US20090039294A1, concerning a radiation-emitting device.
    • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Same assessment as US20090039294A1.

Non-Patent Citations

1. Full Citation: Männing, Bert, "Organische p-I-n Solarzellen" (English translation of relevant pages), Dissertation; Dresden 2004.

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2004
   • Brief Description: Dissertation on organic p-i-n solar cells.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Highly relevant to the solar cell embodiment (claim 12) of US8723164. If this dissertation describes intermediate layers or active layers within p-i-n solar cells that use a combination of three materials with the defined HOMO/LUMO properties to optimize charge transport, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 7, 12, 15, or 16 in the context of solar cells.

2. Full Citation: Miller, Allen et al., "Impurity Conduction at Low Concentrations", Physical Review, vol. 120, No. 3, Nov. 1, 1960, pp. 745-755.

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 1960-11-01
   • Brief Description: A foundational physics paper on impurity conduction. US8723164 references Miller and Abraham's model for determining mobility.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is a fundamental scientific paper cited for its theoretical model (Miller and Abraham model for charge carrier mobility calculation). It does not anticipate any specific device claims (1, 15, 16) or method claims (13, 14) of US8723164, but rather provides underlying scientific principles used in the field.

3. Full Citation: Schwartz, Gregor et al., "High efficiency white organic light emitting diodes combining fluorescent and phosphorescent emitter systems", Organic Optoelectronics and Photonics II, Proc. of SPIE, vol. 6192, No. 61920Q, 2006, pp. 1-6.

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006
   • Brief Description: Research paper on high-efficiency white OLEDs combining different emitter systems.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Highly relevant as US8723164 discusses multiple emission layers and combining phosphorescent and fluorescent emitters. This paper likely describes host matrices for such systems. If it discloses a host comprising three matrix materials with the specified HOMO/LUMO relationships to achieve high efficiency and charge balance, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 15, or 16.

4. Full Citation: Tsai, Yung-Cheng et al., "Long-lifetime, high-efficiency white organic light-emitting diodes with mixed host composing double emission layers", Applied Physics Letters, vol. 89, No. 243521, pp. 1-3.

   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication: 2006
   • Brief Description: Research paper on long-lifetime, high-efficiency white OLEDs utilizing mixed hosts in double emission layers.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is very relevant due to its focus on "mixed host" and "double emission layers" for achieving "long-lifetime, high-efficiency" in white OLEDs. US8723164 aims for improved charge carrier transport, balance, and efficiency, and discusses multiple emission layers. If this "mixed host" explicitly comprises three materials with the specific HOMO/LUMO energy levels and functions as described in US8723164, it could potentially anticipate claims 1, 15, or 16.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 8,723,164 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis assesses the obviousness of US Patent 8,723,164 (hereinafter "'164 patent") based on the provided prior art. The '164 patent generally claims an electronic device, such as an Organic Light-Emitting Diode (OLED), comprising at least one organic functional layer with a combination of at least three matrix materials having specific Lowest Unoccupied Molecular Orbital (LUMO) and Highest Occupied Molecular Orbital (HOMO) energy level relationships. The invention aims to improve charge carrier transport and balance, thereby increasing device efficiency.

A person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) in the field of organic electronic devices, such as OLEDs, at the time of the '164 patent's priority date (May 30, 2008), would have been familiar with the fundamental principles of OLED operation, including charge injection, transport, and recombination, as well as the significance of HOMO and LUMO energy levels for material selection. A POSITA would also recognize the common problem of unbalanced charge carrier transport leading to reduced device efficiency and lifetime.

Independent Claims to be Analyzed:

• Claim 1: Directed to an electronic device with a substrate, electrodes, and an organic functional emission layer doped with an emitter material, wherein the emission layer has at least a first, second, and third matrix material. The claim specifies relative HOMO/LUMO energy levels: the third matrix material has a LUMO lower than the LUMO of the second and first matrix materials, and the second matrix material has a HOMO higher than the HOMO of the first and third matrix materials.
• Claim 13: A method for producing the electronic device of claim 1, comprising simultaneously applying the three matrix materials (e.g., by coevaporation).
• Claim 15: Similar to Claim 1, but further specifies that the first matrix material has a LUMO higher than the LUMO of the second and third matrix materials, and a HOMO lower than the HOMO of the second and third matrix materials.
• Claim 16: Similar to Claim 1, but further specifies that the first matrix material has a charge carrier mobility lower than the charge carrier mobilities of the second and third matrix materials.

Combinations of Prior Art References and Motivation for Combination:

The core inventive concept of the '164 patent lies in the use of three matrix materials in an organic functional layer, particularly an emission layer, with specific energy level alignments to manage charge carrier transport. The first matrix material is typically characterized by a large band gap and low charge carrier mobility, functioning as an electrically inactive diluent.

Combination 1: Tsai et al. (2006) in view of general knowledge in the art (including Miller et al. (1960) and Schwartz et al. (2006))

1. Tsai, Yung-Cheng et al., "Long-lifetime, high-efficiency white organic light-emitting diodes with mixed host composing double emission layers," Applied Physics Letters (2006):

   • Disclosure: This non-patent literature reference explicitly teaches the use of "mixed host" systems in OLEDs to improve carrier injection balance and suppress color shift. It highlights the problem of color change due to a shift in the recombination zone and seeks to confine this zone. The paper states that "adding TBRb in NPB can improve the balance of carrier injection into emitting layer to reach longer operational durability." This demonstrates the concept of using multiple components within a host system to achieve improved charge carrier balance and device stability. While it describes "dual emitting layers" each potentially with mixed hosts, it establishes the motivation for and efficacy of tailoring the host environment with multiple materials to manage charge carriers.
   • Relevance to '164 Patent: Tsai et al. provides the foundational motivation for using mixed hosts to address charge imbalance and improve efficiency/lifetime in OLED emission layers, which is a primary objective of the '164 patent.

2. General Knowledge in the Art (e.g., implicit in Miller et al. (1960) and understood by a POSITA):

   • A POSITA would understand that different organic materials possess varying intrinsic hole and electron transport characteristics, directly related to their HOMO and LUMO energy levels. Specifically, a material with a high HOMO is suitable for hole transport, and a material with a low LUMO is suitable for electron transport.
   • A POSITA would also understand that the concentration of active charge-transporting molecules within a matrix influences their effective charge carrier mobility. Lower concentrations increase the average hopping distance between active molecules, thereby reducing mobility. The '164 patent itself cites Miller, Allen et al., "Impurity Conduction at Low Concentrations," Physical Review (1960), indicating the relevance of concentration to mobility in the field.
   • Schwartz, Gregor et al., "High efficiency white organic light emitting diodes combining fluorescent and phosphorescent emitter systems," Proc. of SPIE (2006), while focusing on emitter systems, generally discusses "reducing energetic and ohmic losses that occur during electron-photon conversion." This broadly points to the ongoing effort to optimize charge transport and energy transfer to improve OLED efficiency, reinforcing the motivation for the work described in Tsai et al.

Motivation for Combination and Obviousness:

A POSITA, motivated by the teachings of Tsai et al. to improve charge carrier balance and device stability in OLEDs using mixed host systems, would naturally seek further methods to precisely control and independently adjust the mobilities of holes and electrons within the emission layer. The problem of unbalanced charge transport was well-recognized.

Starting from a mixed host containing at least two materials (one primarily for hole transport and one primarily for electron transport, or an ambipolar host alongside a selective transport material), a POSITA would recognize that to fine-tune the relative mobilities, simply adjusting the ratio of these two active components might not provide sufficient independent control, or might inadvertently alter other critical properties.

A POSITA, aware of the relationship between concentration and mobility (e.g., as taught by Miller et al., or general knowledge), would be motivated to introduce a third matrix material that is substantially electrically inactive (i.e., having a large band gap, with a high LUMO and low HOMO, such that it does not participate significantly in charge transport itself). This third, inactive material would then serve as a "diluent" or "spacer." By independently varying the concentration of this inactive third material, a POSITA could then adjust the average distances between the molecules of the hole-transporting second matrix material and the electron-transporting third matrix material, thereby independently controlling their effective mobilities within the emission layer.

The specific HOMO/LUMO relationships recited in Claim 1 (third matrix material having the lowest LUMO, second matrix material having the highest HOMO) would be an obvious choice for a POSITA intending to designate one material primarily for electron transport and another for hole transport, respectively. Likewise, the further characteristics of the first matrix material in Claims 15 and 16 (high LUMO and low HOMO to effectively block transport, and low charge carrier mobility) are precisely the properties a POSITA would select for an electrically inactive diluent. The goal of using such a diluent would be to modulate the effective concentrations of the two active transport materials without introducing new, undesirable charge transport pathways.

Regarding Claim 13 (Method Claim):

The method of simultaneously applying multiple matrix materials, such as by coevaporation, was a standard and well-known technique in OLED fabrication for creating mixed layers with precisely controlled concentrations of components. The '164 patent itself describes this in its detailed description (e.g., referring to FIG. 5 and evaporation sources with layer thickness monitors). Therefore, applying three matrix materials simultaneously via evaporation coating to achieve desired concentrations would have been an obvious manufacturing choice for a POSITA seeking to implement a three-matrix-material layer.

Conclusion of Obviousness:

It would have been obvious to a POSITA, at the time of the invention, to combine the teachings of Tsai et al. (2006) regarding the use of mixed host systems for improving charge carrier balance and device performance with the general knowledge in the art (including principles of charge transport and concentration effects as understood by a POSITA, and concepts implicitly referenced in Miller et al. (1960) and broadly related in Schwartz et al. (2006)). A POSITA, motivated to further optimize charge balance and control individual carrier mobilities, would have been led to introduce a third, electrically inactive matrix material with appropriate HOMO/LUMO levels (as described for the first matrix material in the '164 patent). This inactive material would serve as a diluent, allowing for independent adjustment of the concentrations (and thus mobilities) of the primary hole and electron transport materials, thereby achieving the desired adaptable ratio of hole and electron transport and improved efficiency. The specific energy level relationships of the three matrix materials as claimed are the logical outcome of selecting materials for these functionally distinct roles (electron transport, hole transport, and inert diluent). The method of simultaneous application (Claim 13) would also be an obvious manufacturing choice using conventional techniques like coevaporation.