Chassis Domain Control Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing has cooled since 2020. the peak year for this dataset, with 145 records, against 97 at the 2022 midpoint and a partial 17 in the most recent year — read the tail end as reporting lag, not collapse.
- No single filer dominates. the leader holds 95 records out of 4,031 in scope, and the top 5 combined account for just 8.9% of all records — this is a fragmented field, not a fenced one.
- Compute and control classes trail mechanical ones. vehicle suspension (B60G) and digital data processing (G06F) sit well behind the dataset's broader IPC mix, suggesting arbitration and software-update claims are less crowded than the mechanical hardware around them.
What chassis domain control integration covers
Chassis domain control integration is the consolidation of previously separate vehicle systems — suspension, steering, braking and stability control — onto a shared compute and network layer. The patent activity in this dataset spans coordinated actuation, arbitration between control requests, compute consolidation and partitioning, and the software-update and validation strategies needed to keep a consolidated controller safe to ship. It sits at the intersection of mechanical suspension hardware and the software architecture that now governs it.
The scope here runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, covering 4,031 published records. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent year understates real filing activity; treat 2026 as incomplete rather than as a trend signal.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 4,031 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A field that peaked in 2020
Filings ran from 125 in 2017 to a peak of 145 in 2020, settling to 97 at the 2022 midpoint before the partial, lag-affected count of 17 in the latest year. Read the shape as flat-to-declining rather than a market in retreat — publication lag understates the last one to two years in any such trend.
Mechanical hardware still outweighs control software
Vehicle suspension (B60G, 12.8% of records) and springs and vibration dampers (F16F, 6.8%) lead the automotive-specific classes, with motor vehicles and steering (B62D, 5.2%) close behind. Electric digital data processing (G06F, 6.9%) — the class most likely to carry arbitration and partitioning claims — sits below the mechanical hardware classes, and the search also pulls in adjacent classes such as A61K, A61P, B01D and G01N that reflect the broader corpus this query touches rather than chassis-specific art.
Shares are the percentage of the 4,031 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Chassis Domain Control Integration with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about chassis domain control integration and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative record and the most-cited prior art
US20060218545A1 — Server system and online software update method (NEC Corporation, 2006-09-28)
A server delivers new software to each of clients through the network. After delivering new software, the server sends a notification of switchover from old software to new software to each of the clients through the network. Each client loads the new software having been received on a memory. Receiving the notification from the server, each client switches the old software to the new software. The switchover operation at client is carried out in short time by rewriting address on memory without suspension of a service. In case of canceling the update, the reversion operation from new software to old software is carried out in an analogous way to the switchover operation.Filed in 2006, well before chassis domain controllers existed as a product category, this record's claims on memory-address switchover during a live software update sit upstream of any over-the-air update scheme for a consolidated controller.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20140350836A1 | Automotive auxiliary ladar sensor | 396 |
| 2 | US20090293056A1 | Methods and systems for automatic self-management of virtual machines in cloud-based networks | 385 |
| 3 | US20080053205A1 | Droplet-based particle sorting | 383 |
| 4 | WO1995012608A1 | Synthesizing and screening molecular diversity | 379 |
| 5 | US6165778A | Reaction vessel agitation apparatus | 279 |
| 6 | US6131709A | Adjustable valve and vibration damper utilizing same | 258 |
| 7 | US5763388A | Process for producing improved silica-reinforced masterbatch of polymers prepared in latex form | 253 |
| 8 | US4797285A | Lipsome/anthraquinone drug composition and method | 234 |
| 9 | US7901947B2 | Droplet-based particle sorting | 232 |
| 10 | US6242594B1 | Process for glucan preparation and therapeutic uses of glucan | 220 |
Citation counts inside this corpus skew toward older filings and are a signal of influence, 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 →Reading the numbers
Three findings that shape where to file and who to watch.
A fragmented leaderboard
The leader holds 95 records; by fifth place that has fallen to 50, and by tenth place to 31. With the top 5 combined at just 8.9% of all records in scope, no single company has fenced off the field the way concentration numbers above 30-40% would suggest.
Momentum has stalled across the board
Several of the more active historical filers show zero records in the latest year, with year-over-year changes at 0% or -100% rather than continued growth. That pattern is consistent with the broader trend line, which peaked in 2020 and has not recovered since.
Control software trails mechanical hardware
Vehicle suspension (B60G) claims run nearly double the share of the digital-processing class (G06F) that would carry arbitration and compute-partitioning claims. That gap is where a domain-controller software architecture is more likely to find open claim space than in the mechanical hardware around it.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to chassis domain control integration, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranking behind this page covers 100 companies, counted by patent family. It is not a top-50 or top-100 shortlist in the conventional sense — it is the full set the underlying data endpoint returns, and even the leader holds a modest share of the total.
A lead without a monopoly
The leading assignee's 95 records look substantial in isolation but represent a small fraction of the 4,031 records in scope. Co-assignee activity around Toyota-affiliated entities is the strongest pairing signal in the dataset, suggesting internal cross-filing between related corporate entities rather than external partnership.
A steep drop-off past the top five
Filing volume falls from 50 records at fifth place to 31 at tenth, a sharper decline than the drop from first to fifth. That shape points to a long tail of moderate filers rather than a small cartel holding the technology.
Recent activity has gone quiet
Several assignees that built meaningful portfolios earlier in the window show no filings in the latest year, with year-over-year figures at -100% or flat at zero. Combined with the 2020 peak in the overall trend, this points to a field in a consolidation or pause phase rather than active build-out.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Jaguar Land Rover Limited | 1 | 0% |
| Mazda Motor Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Procter & Gamble Co. | 0 | -100% |
| KYB Corporation | 0 | — |
| Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Toyota Motor Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| ConocoPhillips Company | 0 | — |
| Honda Motor Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with room to file rather than one that is closing off. The next step is narrowing from the landscape to a specific claim strategy.
Map the arbitration sub-claims in detail
G06F's comparatively low share against mechanical classes like B60G suggests the software layer governing multi-system arbitration is less densely claimed. A finer-grained search inside that class would clarify exactly which arbitration schemes are already occupied.
Explore this in EurekaTrack the assignees with stalled momentum
Several previously active filers show zero filings in the latest year. Whether that reflects a pause, a shift to trade secret, or a shift to adjacent domains is worth watching before committing a filing strategy.
Set up monitoring in EurekaBuild a design-around for the software-update claims
The representative record's memory-switchover approach to live updates is broad enough to touch any over-the-air scheme for a consolidated controller. A design-around analysis is a reasonable next step before committing to an update architecture.
Run a design-around search in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The search covers records that combine chassis-level hardware terms — suspension, coordinated actuation, integrated chassis control — with control-layer concepts such as arbitration, compute consolidation, partitioning and network latency. It captures the consolidation of previously separate ECUs (suspension, steering, stability) onto shared compute, not suspension hardware in isolation. The 4,031 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off.
The ranking behind this page covers 100 companies by patent family, with the leader holding 95 records and the top 5 combined accounting for 8.9% of all 4,031 records in scope. That is a fragmented field: no single company holds a commanding share, and filing volume drops steadily rather than in a sharp cliff after the top few. Co-assignee patterns point to cross-filing within related corporate groups rather than joint ventures between unrelated companies.
Filing peaked in 2020 at 145 records, fell to 97 by the 2022 midpoint, and shows only 17 in the most recent year. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the last one to two years in any trend understate real activity, so the 2026 figure should not be read as a collapse. Taken together, the shape is flat-to-declining rather than a field still ramping up.
It is a 2006 NEC record on delivering software updates to clients and switching between old and new versions by rewriting memory addresses without suspending service, including a rollback path if the update is cancelled. It predates chassis domain controllers as a product category but its claims sit upstream of any live, in-service software-update mechanism for a consolidated controller. Anyone designing an over-the-air update scheme for a domain controller should check freedom to operate against it rather than assume it is irrelevant because it predates the application area.
The IPC composition shows vehicle suspension and mechanical damper classes carrying more claim density than the digital-processing class most likely to hold arbitration and compute-partitioning claims. That gap, together with stalled recent-year filing momentum across several previously active assignees, suggests the control-software layer — arbitration between competing actuation requests, compute partitioning across consolidated ECUs, and validation strategies for vehicle-level stability — is less crowded than the mechanical hardware it coordinates.
Research Chassis Domain Control Integration in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole chassis domain control integration 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.