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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (39 records) with 2024 (28) — 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 378 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
This landscape tracks 378 patent families filed against 3D NAND flash memory, scoped to documents whose claims specifically address channel hole etch, word-line stack, charge trap layer, string stacking or vertical channel construction. The IPC scope centres on H10B41/27 and H10B43/27 (vertical memory device manufacture) alongside G11C16 (non-volatile memory circuits), which keeps the set to fabrication and structural claims rather than general flash-memory controller or interface patents.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, with United States filings dominating the receiving-office split (233 records), followed by PCT, EPO, China, Taiwan and South Korea. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent drop-off in the most recent one to two years understates real filing activity rather than reflecting an actual halt.
Annual filing counts and IPC subclass distribution across the 378-family dataset, drawn directly from the search scope described above.
Filings climbed from 17 in 2017 to a peak of 63 in 2020, then fell back toward the 2022 midpoint of 19. Read the final one to two years with the publication lag in mind: they will understate actual filing volume, but the multi-year decline from the 2020 peak predates that lag and looks like a genuine slowdown in new claim activity.
H10B (memory device manufacture) covers 302 of 378 families and H01L (semiconductor devices generally) covers 254, both ahead of G11C (memory circuits, 131) and H10D (general semiconductor devices, 98). The smaller C23C (coating and surface deposition, 5) and G06F (data processing, 3) counts mark the edges of the scope rather than active sub-fields — thin film deposition and system-level claims are largely filed elsewhere.
Shares are the percentage of the 378 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about 3d nand flash technology landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe claim combines a conventional charge-trap memory stack — a charge trap layer and tunneling oxide layer between a gate layer and channel layer — with an insulating piezoelectric gate layer separated from that stack by an air gap. The application covers both the memory cell structure and a method for forming a vertical memory array built on it.The piezoelectric-gate-plus-air-gap element is what differentiates this from the older, more heavily cited vertical NAND stack patents in this dataset.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20120001249A1 | Ultrahigh density vertical NAND memory device & method of making thereof | 417 |
| 2 | US20110286283A1 | 3D two-bit-per-cell NAND flash memory | 368 |
| 3 | US8349681B2 | Ultrahigh density monolithic, three dimensional vertical NAND memory device | 303 |
| 4 | US20160204117A1 | Vertical NAND and method of making thereof using sequential stack etching and self-aligned landing pad | 290 |
| 5 | US20130264631A1 | Vertical NAND device with low capacitance and silicided word lines | 251 |
| 6 | US8878278B2 | Compact three dimensional vertical NAND and method of making thereof | 169 |
| 7 | US20160071861A1 | 3D semicircular vertical NAND string with self aligned floating gate or charge trap cell memory cells and met… | 163 |
| 8 | US20160343727A1 | Vertical NAND flash memory device | 123 |
| 9 | US9634097B2 | 3D NAND with oxide semiconductor channel | 120 |
| 10 | US9960045B1 | Charge-trap layer separation and word-line isolation for enhanced 3-D NAND structure | 118 |
Citation counts inside this corpus favour older filings that have had more years to accumulate references — treat them as a measure of foundational influence, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three patterns stand out once filing counts, IPC composition and citation concentration are read together.
A peak in 2020 followed by a decline through the 2022 midpoint indicates the core structural approaches to vertical channel and word-line stack construction were largely claimed in the late 2010s. New filings now more likely refine or design around those positions than open new ground.
The dominance of H10B manufacture claims over G11C circuit claims (131) shows competitive pressure concentrates on how the vertical stack, channel hole etch and charge trap layer are physically built — the process integration layer — rather than on memory addressing or sensing circuitry.
The most-cited records date to the early 2010s and describe the foundational vertical NAND stack and charge-trap architectures. Their citation counts are inflated by age relative to more recent filings, but the concentration still signals which structural approaches later filers had to build around.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to 3d nand flash technology landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | ZHANG YUAN | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | SAMACHISA GEORGE | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | PURAYATH VINOD | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | MATAMIS GEORGE | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | LEE YAO SHENG | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | KAI JAMES | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | CHIEN HENRY | 2 |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | ALSMEIER JOHANN | 2 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across 378 families, with the strongest pairs linking one major assignee to individual named inventors rather than to other companies — this is a field of solo corporate filers, not joint ventures.
Filing activity concentrates among a small group of memory manufacturers and equipment suppliers, all of which show no filings in the latest tracked year — a pattern consistent with publication lag rather than a genuine stop.
Assignees including Yangtze Memory Technologies, Samsung, SanDisk, Intel, Macronix and Applied Materials all report zero filings in the latest year, several with -100% year-on-year change. Given the 18-month publication lag, this reflects filings still working through the pipeline rather than a real halt in R&D.
The dataset's citation leaders and recent filers overlap only partially — the companies with the most historically influential patents are not always the same ones filing most actively now, pointing to a field where incumbents defend early ground while others, like IMEC, contribute newer structural variants.
With only 10 co-assignee pairs identified, and the strongest ones linking a single company to named individual inventors, cross-company collaboration is not a visible pattern in this landscape — most families are filed by one assignee alone.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Yangtze Memory Technologies Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Macronix International Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| SanDisk Technologies LLC | 0 | — |
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Intel Corporation | 0 | — |
| Tokyo Electron Limited | 0 | — |
| Interuniversity Microelectronics Centre (IMEC) | 0 | -100% |
The dataset points to a mature claim space around the core vertical stack, with narrower openings at its structural edges.
The five most-cited records anchor the foundational vertical NAND and charge-trap architecture claims that later filings had to design around. Any new fabrication approach should be checked against these before further development spend.
Run a freedom-to-operate search in EurekaZero filings in the latest year across every major holder is consistent with publication lag, not a stop in R&D. Watching for the next wave of publications from these assignees will clarify whether the 2020 peak was a one-off or the field genuinely plateaued.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaPiezoelectric gate integration and air-gap isolation, as seen in the IMEC filing, sit outside the dense core of channel-hole and word-line-stack claims. These narrower branches may offer more workable filing room than the core stack architecture.
Explore white space mapping in EurekaThe most heavily cited records in this dataset, several exceeding 250-400 citations, describe the foundational vertical NAND stack and charge-trap architecture and date to the early 2010s. Current major assignees active in the space include Samsung, SanDisk, Yangtze Memory Technologies, Intel, Macronix and Applied Materials, based on the ranking of 378 tracked patent families. Note that the companies holding the oldest, most-cited foundational patents are not necessarily the same ones filing most actively today, since citation counts favour older records simply by virtue of having had more time to accumulate references.
No — filings rose from 17 in 2017 to a peak of 63 in 2020, then declined to 19 by the 2022 midpoint, indicating the technology's core structural claims are largely staked out rather than still expanding. The most recent one to two years in any such trend should be read cautiously, since publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months and will understate true recent activity. Even accounting for that lag, the multi-year decline from the 2020 peak suggests a genuine slowdown rather than a data artefact alone.
This landscape is scoped to claims involving channel hole etch, word-line stack construction, charge trap layer design, string stacking and vertical channel formation, corresponding to IPC classes H10B41/27, H10B43/27 and G11C16. The data shows manufacturing and structural claims (H10B, 302 of 378 families) substantially outweigh circuit-level claims (G11C, 131), meaning most of the competitive claim activity is about how the vertical stack is physically fabricated rather than how the memory circuit operates. Adjacent classes like C23C (coating and deposition) and G06F (data processing) appear only marginally, marking the edges of the field rather than active centres of filing.
Based on the IPC composition and recent representative filings, narrower structural variants such as piezoelectric gate layer integration, air-gap isolation within the memory stack, and specific thin-film deposition methods for charge trap layers show thinner coverage relative to the dense core claims on channel hole etch and word-line stacking. A recent IMEC filing (US20250212412A1) illustrates one such variant, combining a standard charge-trap stack with a piezoelectric gate layer separated by an air gap. These edges are worth checking specifically because the core vertical-stack claim space, per the 2020 filing peak, is already heavily occupied.
This pattern — appearing across Yangtze Memory Technologies, Samsung, SanDisk, Intel, Macronix and Applied Materials alike — is a direct effect of patent publication lag, which typically runs about 18 months from filing to public disclosure. A zero in the latest tracked year does not mean these companies stopped filing; it means those filings have not yet published. The more meaningful signal is the multi-year decline from the 2020 peak through the 2022 midpoint, which predates the lag window and points to an actual slowdown in new structural claims.
Go past this page: query the whole 3d nand flash technology landscape 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.