Prior art — US Patent 7279708

As a senior US patent analyst, I have reviewed the prior art cited during the prosecution of U.S. Patent 7,279,708. The following analysis details the most relevant references cited by the USPTO patent examiner and discusses their potential impact on the patentability of the '708 patent's claims. This analysis is based on the information available as of today, May 13, 2026.

Understanding Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102

For a prior art reference to "anticipate" a patent claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102, it must explicitly or inherently disclose every single element and limitation of that claim, arranged as in the claim. If even one element is missing, the claim is not anticipated, though it might be rendered obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The following analysis focuses strictly on potential anticipation.

Analysis of Prior Art Cited in U.S. Patent 7,279,708

The examiner of the '708 patent cited five prior art references. The most pertinent of these are detailed below.

1. US Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0200270 A1 (Kwak)

Full Citation: US 2005/0200270 A1, "Electroluminescence display device," filed March 9, 2004, and published September 15, 2005. The inventor is Won-Kyu Kwak, who is also the lead inventor on the '708 patent.
Brief Description: This application, from the same inventor and assigned to the same entity (Samsung), discloses an EL display designed to reduce contact resistance between a cathode and a power supply line. It describes using an auxiliary electrode (similar to the '708 patent's sub-conductive layer) made of the same material as the pixel electrode (anode) to connect the power line to the cathode. The primary goal is to prevent a voltage drop (IR drop) across the display.
Potential Anticipation of Claim(s):
- Claims 1 & 9: This reference is highly relevant as it teaches the core structure of using an auxiliary conductive layer to connect the power line to the second electrode. It discloses the display area with pixels, a power line, an insulating layer, and a via hole. However, a key element of claim 1—the "penetration portion"—is not explicitly described or illustrated in the '270 application. The '270 application focuses on ensuring a good electrical connection over a wide area, not on providing a path for gas to escape. Similarly, claim 9 requires a plurality of separated unit sub-conductive layers, a specific structure not taught by this reference. Therefore, while close, the '270 application does not appear to fully anticipate claims 1 or 9 because it lacks the novel gas-venting feature.
- Claims 11 & 15: As the '270 application does not teach the structure of a "penetration portion" or "unit sub-conductive layers," it does not anticipate the method claims (11 and 15) which require the step of forming these specific features.

2. Japanese Patent Publication No. JP2001005426A (Semiconductor Energy Lab)

Full Citation: JP 2001-005426 A, "EL display device and electronic device," filed June 23, 1999, and published January 12, 2001. Assignee: Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
Brief Description: This document describes an active matrix EL display. It focuses on the layout and structure of the pixel-driving circuits and power lines. It discloses various configurations for thin-film transistors (TFTs) and electrodes within the pixel architecture.
Potential Anticipation of Claim(s):
- Claims 1, 9, 11, 15: This reference teaches the general structure of an active matrix EL display, including first and second electrodes, an EL layer, and power supply lines. However, it does not describe the specific arrangement claimed in the '708 patent for connecting the second electrode to the power supply line. Specifically, it does not disclose a "sub-conductive layer" formed over an organic insulating layer with "penetration portions" or as "separated unit sub-conductive layers" for the purpose of outgassing. The connection methods shown are more conventional. Therefore, this reference does not anticipate the independent claims of the '708 patent.

3. Japanese Patent Publication No. JP2001076868A (Semiconductor Energy Lab)

Full Citation: JP 2001-076868 A, "El display device and electronic device," filed June 28, 1999, and published March 23, 2001. Assignee: Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
Brief Description: This publication details an EL display device with a focus on improving the reliability and manufacturing process. It discusses the structure of the pixel-defining layers and the formation of the organic layers and electrodes.
Potential Anticipation of Claim(s):
- Claims 1, 9, 11, 15: Similar to the reference above, this document provides general background on the structure of EL displays. It does not, however, teach the specific structure of an intermediate "sub-conductive layer" situated on an organic insulating layer and featuring perforations or a separated structure to facilitate gas venting during fabrication. The novel elements of the '708 patent's claims are absent. Thus, it does not anticipate the independent claims.

Summary of Prior Art Relevance

The prior art cited by the examiner establishes the general state of the art for active matrix electroluminescent displays at the time of the invention. The references describe the fundamental components: substrates, TFTs, pixel electrodes, organic layers, and power lines.

However, none of the cited references appear to explicitly or inherently disclose the key inventive concept of U.S. Patent 7,279,708: the introduction of a specific structure in the sub-conductive layer to facilitate the outgassing from an underlying organic insulating layer. Claim 1 recites this structure as one or more "penetration portions," while claim 9 defines it as a plurality of "unit sub-conductive layers" that are separated from each other. The manufacturing method claims (11 and 15) are tied directly to the creation of these specific structures.

The closest reference is the inventor's own prior application, US 2005/0200270 A1, which discloses the use of a sub-conductive layer for improved electrical contact. However, it fails to teach the critical structural modification for outgassing. This distinction was likely the basis upon which the patent examiner allowed the claims of the '708 patent to issue. Therefore, based on the cited art, no single reference appears to anticipate the independent claims of US 7,279,708.