Blue Emitter Lifetime Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 10 records then tapered — with the most recent years still understated by publication lag, so 2025-2026 filings are not yet fully visible in the count.
- A single pillar family anchors the field US6717358B1 on cascaded electroluminescent devices carries 459 citations, far ahead of any other record in this set.
- Claims cluster in H10K and H05B 55.6% and 50.0% of the 36 records respectively, while display-control claims under G09G sit at just 11.1%.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent filings addressing blue OLED lifetime and degradation — the combination of exciton-polaron annihilation, chemical degradation pathways, accelerated aging protocols, burn-in behaviour, driving-current density effects, and host-material stability that together determine how long a blue emitter survives under continuous operation. The scope spans 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, drawing on 36 published records that mention both a lifetime/degradation concern and one of the named technical mechanisms.
Blue emitters remain the shortest-lived channel in most OLED stacks, so patent activity here tends to concentrate on host-dopant pairing, charge-balance layers, and device architectures that slow luminance decay rather than on the emitter chromophore alone. The dataset reflects that: organic semiconductor device classes and lighting-circuit classes dominate, while narrower compound-chemistry classes see comparatively less claim traffic.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 36-record set: the yearly filing count, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, the class shares below add up to more than 100% of the record total.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 in 2020, the busiest year in the set so far. The 2026 figure is partial by definition — publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so recent years always understate actual filing activity until later data cuts catch up.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
Organic semiconductor claims (H10K) appear in 55.6% of the 36 records and lighting-circuit claims (H05B) in 50.0%, making these the two densest claim zones. Compound-chemistry classes — C07F organo-metallic compounds at 30.6% and C07D heterocyclics at 19.4% — see markedly less coverage, and display-control circuitry (G09G) trails at 11.1%.
Shares are the percentage of the 36 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Blue Emitter Lifetime and Degradation with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about blue emitter lifetime and degradation and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this set
US20040183066A1 — P-type materials and mixtures for electronic devices
A p-type mixture for use in an electronic device including a host including a dihydrophenazine compound, and a dopant provided in the host.Filed by Global OLED Technology LLC; illustrates the host-dopant claim style common across this dataset rather than a novel mechanism.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6717358B1 | Cascaded organic electroluminescent devices with improved voltage stability | 459 |
| 2 | US20090045728A1 | Electronic device with a layer structure of organic layers | 137 |
| 3 | EP1408563A2 | Cascaded organic electroluminescent devices with improved voltage stability | 83 |
| 4 | WO2007071450A1 | Electronic device with a layer structure of organic layers | 50 |
| 5 | US6991859B2 | Cascaded organic electroluminescent devices | 46 |
| 6 | EP1804309A1 | Electronic device with a layer structure of organic layers | 45 |
| 7 | US20040185297A1 | Cascaded organic electroluminescent devices | 40 |
| 8 | US20180247588A1 | Light-Emitting Diode Displays with Predictive Luminance Compensation | 35 |
| 9 | US20170076661A1 | Light-Emitting Diode Displays with Predictive Luminance Compensation | 34 |
| 10 | US7830089B2 | Electronic device with a layer structure of organic layers | 25 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations inside this searched corpus — treat them as a measure of influence on later filings, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the filing pattern tells you
Three read-throughs from the trend, the citation table, and the IPC split that matter for anyone deciding where to file or where to license.
One family dominates the citation graph
US6717358B1, on cascaded electroluminescent devices with improved voltage stability, carries far more citations than any other record in the set, with its related filings EP1408563A2 and US6991859B2 also appearing high in the table. New entrants building on cascaded or stacked device architectures for lifetime improvement are filing into a heavily cited prior-art zone.
Device architecture is crowded, display-control logic is not
Organic semiconductor device claims (H10K) and lighting-circuit claims (H05B) cover roughly half the 36 records each, while claims tied to display-control circuitry (G09G) appear in only 11.1%. Software- and circuit-level approaches to managing blue-emitter burn-in and decay look comparatively open relative to materials and device-structure claims.
Activity peaked in 2020, then eased
The trend climbs from zero in 2017 to a high of 10 filings in 2020, the busiest single year in this set. Growth rate before or after that peak is not reliable to state from this dataset — there are too few complete years once publication lag is factored in.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to blue emitter lifetime and degradation, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Novaled GmbH | WERNER ANSGAR | 1 |
| Novaled GmbH | MURANO SVEN | 1 |
| Novaled GmbH | BURGHART MARKUS | 1 |
| Novaled GmbH | BIRNSTOCK JAN | 1 |
| The Regents of the University of Michigan | University of Southern California | 1 |
| WERNER ANSGAR | MURANO SVEN | 1 |
| WERNER ANSGAR | BURGHART MARKUS | 1 |
| WERNER ANSGAR | BIRNSTOCK JAN | 1 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset; the strongest links pair Novaled with individual named inventors, suggesting inventor-level collaboration rather than cross-company joint filing.
Who is filing
The assignee ranking covers 12 companies as returned by the data endpoint — not a top-50 or top-100 cut, the full ranked list this evidence set produces. The leader holds 10 records; by fifth place that falls to 4, and the twelfth-ranked entrant holds 1.
A clear leader, then a fast drop-off
The top-ranked assignee in this set holds 10 of the 36 records, while fifth place already falls to 4 and the ranking tails off to single-digit and single-record holders by the tenth position. That shape points to one or two organisations with a sustained filing programme around blue-emitter stability, surrounded by occasional filers.
Most named assignees filed once or twice
Beyond the leading names, the ranking is populated by individual inventors and smaller filers with one or two records each. This is typical of a mechanism-specific niche: universities, named inventors and device makers file opportunistically around a stability problem rather than building large portfolios.
No visible recent-year momentum, but expect lag
Every tracked leading assignee shows zero filings in the latest year, including a -100% year-on-year reading for one university assignee. Given the roughly 18-month gap between filing and publication, this is consistent with normal reporting lag rather than a real pullback in R&D.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| CHE CHI MING | 0 | — |
| Eastman Kodak Company | 0 | — |
| Novaled GmbH | 0 | — |
| The Regents of the University of Michigan | 0 | -100% |
| Apple Inc. | 0 | — |
| Universal Display Corporation | 0 | — |
| University of Southern California | 0 | -100% |
| Global OLED Technology LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The landscape points to a crowded device-architecture layer sitting on top of a comparatively open circuit and control layer. Two directions follow from that.
Check freedom to operate around the pillar family
Any cascaded or stacked device architecture aimed at improving blue-emitter voltage or lifetime stability should be checked against US6717358B1 and its related family before further development spend.
Explore citation network in EurekaScope claims in the lighter-claimed circuit layer
Display-control and driving-current management approaches to burn-in and decay show markedly lower claim density than device or materials claims, which may leave room for a defensible filing position.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
Blue emitters require higher-energy excitons to produce their emission, and that extra energy accelerates exciton-polaron annihilation and chemical bond-breaking in the host and emitter materials. The patent record in this space reflects that pressure: host-stability and driving-current-density claims make up a large share of filings, since controlling exciton and charge behaviour is the main lever available to slow decay. Device architecture, particularly charge-balance and cascaded layer structures, is the most heavily claimed response, as shown by the citation weight on the pillar family in this dataset.
In this dataset, US6717358B1 on cascaded organic electroluminescent devices with improved voltage stability is by far the most-cited record, with 459 citations, alongside related filings EP1408563A2, WO2007071450A1 and US6991859B2 in the same citation family. Beyond that pillar, filing activity is led by one assignee holding 10 of the 36 records in scope, with a fast drop to single-digit counts by the fifth-ranked filer. That pattern suggests influence is concentrated in a small number of foundational device-architecture filings rather than spread evenly across the field.
Yes, relative to device architecture and materials claims. Display-control circuitry for managing burn-in (IPC class G09G) appears in only 11.1% of the 36 records in this set, well below the 55.6% and 50.0% seen in organic semiconductor and lighting-circuit classes respectively. That gap suggests driving-current management and compensation-circuit approaches to lifetime extension are comparatively lightly claimed, though any filing there should still be checked against the broader device-architecture prior art.
Not very, and that is expected rather than a data error. Patent publication typically lags the actual filing date by around 18 months, so any record filed in the past year or two is likely still working its way through examination and has not yet published. The 2026 figure in this dataset should be read as a floor, not a final count, and the true peak year may not be confirmed until later data cuts.
It is the full ranked list of assignees the dataset returns for this search — 12 companies in total, not a top-50 or top-100 cut applied afterward. The leading assignee holds 10 of the 36 records, falling to 4 by fifth place and to a single record by the tenth position, which is a leader-plus-long-tail shape rather than even distribution. Because the ranking and the overall record count are different units, no single concentration percentage can be stated from this evidence.
Research Blue Emitter Lifetime and Degradation in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole blue emitter lifetime and degradation corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.