Anisotropic Conductive Film Bonding Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Filings are concentrated at the top: the top 5 assignees account for 44.7% of all 5,249 records in scope, and the top 10 for 53.6%.
- Filing pace has cooled from its peak: 2021 to 2024 filings fell 38%, from 180 to 112, after a 2017 peak of 449 — though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in due to publication lag.
- Semiconductor and printed-circuit classes dominate: H01L appears on 45.1% of records and H05K on 24.5%, while adhesive-specific class C09J sits at just 14.8%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (180 records) with 2024 (112) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 5,249 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this dataset covers
Anisotropic conductive film (ACF) bonding sits at the intersection of display assembly, semiconductor packaging and adhesive chemistry: a film loaded with conductive particles is pressed between two sets of terminals so that particles trapped at contact points carry current vertically while the surrounding matrix keeps neighbouring terminals insulated. The technique underpins fine-pitch bonding in flat-panel displays, chip-on-flex and chip-on-glass assembly, and flexible circuit connections, which is why the patent record spans semiconductor device claims as heavily as it spans adhesive or connector claims.
The 5,249 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, drawn from a search string that pairs ACF-specific terms with process markers such as bonding pressure, capture rate and insulation resistance. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years understate real filing activity.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 5,249 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filings rose to a 2017 peak, then eased
Annual filings climbed to 449 in 2017, the peak year in the dataset, before easing to 112 by 2024 — a 38% decline from the 180 filed in 2021. Treat 2025 and 2026 counts as incomplete rather than as evidence of a further drop.
Semiconductor and circuit classes outweigh adhesive-specific claims
H01L (semiconductor devices) appears on 45.1% of the 5,249 records and H05K (printed circuits) on 24.5%, while C09J (adhesives) — the class most directly tied to the bonding material itself — covers only 14.8%. That gap signals that most claim activity is about integrating ACF into a device or assembly, not about the film chemistry in isolation.
Shares are the percentage of the 5,249 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Anisotropic Conductive Film Bonding with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about anisotropic conductive film bonding and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
Anisotropic conductive film and method of making conductive connection (US20140290059A1, Fujifilm)
The film described defines discrete conductive-particle-holding regions within an insulation region, each holding particles at a lower filler content than the surrounding insulation matrix, and pairs this with a preliminary-tacking bonding method between two terminal-bearing members.The structural split between particle-holding regions and insulating filler is the mechanism to check against when assessing freedom to operate on discrete-region ACF designs.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20090073325A1 | Semiconductor device and method for manufacturing the same, and electric device | 4,254 |
| 2 | US6312304B1 | Assembly of microencapsulated electronic displays | 1,018 |
| 3 | US20070123189A1 | Semiconductor device and operating method thereof | 469 |
| 4 | US20080158181A1 | Double-sided touch sensitive panel and flex circuit bonding | 395 |
| 5 | WO2018087625A1 | Display device and driving method of display device | 354 |
| 6 | US20080123383A1 | Rectifier circuit, power supply circuit, and semiconductor device | 293 |
| 7 | US20100072467A1 | Semiconductor device | 273 |
| 8 | US7122835B1 | Electrooptical device and a method of manufacturing the same | 272 |
| 9 | US8497512B2 | Light-emitting device and manufacturing method thereof | 253 |
| 10 | US8138502B2 | Light-emitting device and manufacturing method thereof | 244 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations inside this corpus; treat them as a signal of influence, not of current importance.
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 numbers mean for R&D and IP strategy
Four read-outs from the filing data that matter more for planning than the raw counts alone.
Filing activity sits with a small set of large players
Just five assignees account for 44.7% of every record in scope, and the top ten push that to 53.6%. That leaves a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants working the remaining claim space, which is where most freedom to operate is likely to be found.
Filing pace has come down from its 2017 peak
Annual filings fell from 180 in 2021 to 112 in 2024, continuing a decline from the 2017 peak of 449. That is a real three-year trend, not an artifact of publication lag, since both endpoints are complete years.
Device integration outweighs film chemistry in the claim record
Semiconductor-device claims (H01L) and printed-circuit claims (H05K) together cover far more records than adhesive-specific claims (C09J, 14.8%), meaning most of the contested claim space is about how ACF connects into a device, not the film formulation itself.
A handful of older filings anchor the citation graph
The most-cited record in this dataset carries 4,254 citations, an order of magnitude above the next entries. Because citation counts accumulate over time, this pattern reflects age and foundational status more than current relevance.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to anisotropic conductive film bonding, with the prior art for and against each one.
Leaders, momentum and where the gate sits
The assignee ranking covers 100 companies counted across the 5,249 records in scope — not a top-50 or top-100 shortlist, but the full ranked set the data endpoint returns.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 997 records, far above fifth place at 121 and tenth place at 75. That gap between first place and the rest of the top ten is sharper than the overall top-5/top-10 concentration figures alone suggest.
Even the largest filers have slowed in the most recent year
Several of the most active historical assignees show sharp year-on-year declines in the latest year, with some recording zero filings. Given the 18-month publication lag, this is as likely to reflect incomplete recent data as an actual pullback in R&D.
Co-filing is concentrated around one research group
The strongest co-assignee pairing appears 14 times, and the next two strongest pairings involve the same organisation with different named inventors. Outside that cluster, co-filing between separate companies is limited in this dataset.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. | 2 | -85% |
| Samsung Display Co., Ltd. | 2 | -80% |
| Dexerials Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| LG Electronics Inc. | 0 | — |
| Seiko Epson Corporation | 0 | — |
| Cheil Industries Inc. | 0 | — |
| Resonac Corporation | 0 | — |
| Sharp Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures above describe where filing activity has been. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision needs a closer read of the specific claims in play.
Check freedom to operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 997 records, any new filing in device-integrated ACF bonding should be checked against that portfolio specifically, not just the field average.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches before drafting claims
The gate chips above point to process-level and structural sub-areas with lighter filing density. Confirm that density holds at the claim level before committing to that white space.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about ACF bonding patents
One assignee leads clearly with 997 records in this dataset, well ahead of fifth place at 121 and tenth place at 75. The top 5 assignees together hold 44.7% of all 5,249 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 53.6%. Beyond that group there is a long tail of companies with far fewer filings each, so most of the remaining claim space is held by smaller or single-filing entrants rather than a second tier of large players.
Filing activity peaked in 2017 at 449 records and has since declined, falling 38% from 180 records in 2021 to 112 in 2024. Those are the two most recent years that can be treated as complete. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still filling in because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so they should not be read as confirmation the decline is continuing.
Anisotropic conductive film (ACF) and anisotropic conductive paste (ACP) both use conductive particles suspended in an insulating matrix to make directional electrical connections, but ACF is applied as a pre-formed film while ACP is dispensed as a liquid or paste before bonding. This dataset's search string covers both terms together, and the underlying IPC composition shows adhesive-specific claims (C09J, 14.8% of records) are a smaller share than semiconductor-device (H01L, 45.1%) or printed-circuit (H05K, 24.5%) claims, meaning most patent activity concerns how the film or paste integrates into a device rather than the material itself.
H01L (semiconductor devices) covers 45.1% of the 5,249 records in scope, the largest single class, followed by H05K (printed circuits and assemblies) at 24.5% and H01B (cables, conductors and insulators) at 19.8%. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed together. The practical takeaway is that device-integration claims dominate the field over pure material or adhesive claims.
The clearest opportunities sit in sub-areas that appear less frequently across the classification breakdown relative to the core semiconductor and circuit classes, including low-temperature pre-bonding process steps, discrete particle-holding region structures, and fine-pitch capture-rate optimisation methods. These branches are adjacent to well-claimed territory rather than isolated from it, so any new filing there still needs a freedom-to-operate check against the leading assignees' broader device-integration portfolios before relying on the apparent gap.
Research Anisotropic Conductive Film Bonding in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole anisotropic conductive film bonding 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.