CMOS Image Sensor Patents: Who Leads, Where Gaps Remain 2026
- Filing has cooled from its peak. 2017 was the high-water mark at 162 filings; by the 2022 midpoint the annual count had already slipped to 105, and the years since show no rebound.
- Six major assignees show zero filings in the latest year. Samsung, TSMC, ON Semiconductor, OmniVision, Nikon and Sony all register 0 for the most recent year in this dataset, with Samsung and Nikon down -100% YoY.
- H01L dominates the classification mix. 2,134 of 2,197 families sit under H01L (semiconductor devices) versus 1,154 under H04N (pictorial communication), showing the fight is over device structure, not signal processing.
Filing growth compares 2021 (121 records) with 2024 (54) — 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 2,197 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This review tracks 2,197 published patent families filed against CMOS image sensor terminology combined with claim or description language on backside illumination, stacked CIS, pixel architecture and global shutter pixel, restricted to the core imaging device IPC classes. The scope is deliberately narrow: it captures device-level structural claims rather than every patent that merely mentions an image sensor in passing.
Filing activity concentrates around device fabrication (H01L27/146, H01L27/148) rather than downstream video processing, and the receiving-office split shows the United States as the dominant filing venue, well ahead of Europe, WIPO's PCT route, China, South Korea and Taiwan.
Filing trend and classification mix
Two views of the same 2,197 families: how filing volume moved year over year, and where those filings sit across the semiconductor and imaging IPC classes. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the final one or two years in the trend chart will always look thinner than they will eventually turn out to be.
A declining curve since 2017
Filings peaked at 162 in 2017 and had already fallen to 105 by the 2022 midpoint, with the most recent year showing just 1 record — partly an artefact of publication lag, but consistent with a multi-year downward trend rather than a single-year dip.
Concentrated in semiconductor device classes
H01L (semiconductor devices) accounts for 2,134 of the 2,197 families, roughly double the H04N (pictorial communication) count of 1,154, with G02B optics, G01S positioning and G03B photographic apparatus trailing well behind — the claim activity is overwhelmingly about the sensor die itself, not the systems around it.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,197 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on CMOS Image Sensor Image Sensor with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cmos image sensor image sensor and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a recent representative filing
Method for Forming Backside Illumination CMOS Image Sensor
Filed by Hua Hong Semiconductor (Wuxi) Limited, this application describes a method for forming a backside illumination CMOS image sensor using a first substrate with opposing surfaces, a photoelectric epitaxial layer grown on one surface, and a groove structure separating first and second doped areas within that layer.The claim language centres on the epitaxial layer geometry and doped-area arrangement rather than on circuitry, placing it squarely in the structural fabrication camp that dominates this landscape.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6168965B1 | Method for making backside illuminated image sensor | 379 |
| 2 | US6657665B1 | Active Pixel Sensor with wired floating diffusions and shared amplifier | 357 |
| 3 | US7560701B2 | Highly sensitive, fast pixel for use in an image sensor | 353 |
| 4 | US20080203452A1 | CMOS image sensors including backside illumination structure and method of manufacturing image sensor | 341 |
| 5 | US6169319B1 | Backside illuminated image sensor | 329 |
| 6 | US6714239B2 | Active pixel sensor with programmable color balance | 264 |
| 7 | US6107655A | Active pixel image sensor with shared amplifier read-out | 257 |
| 8 | US20060138322A1 | Backside imaging through a doped layer | 232 |
| 9 | US6552323B2 | Image sensor with a shared output signal line | 217 |
| 10 | US9369621B2 | Devices and methods for high-resolution image and video capture | 209 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus skew toward older, foundational filings — read them as a signal of influence on later work, not as a ranking of current importance. Several of the most-cited records here date to the early backside-illumination era and continue to anchor freedom-to-operate analysis.
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 imply for strategy
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are put side by side: where the claim density actually sits, how concentrated the field is among filers, and what a cooling filing curve does and does not mean.
The contest is structural, not algorithmic
Nearly twice as many families sit in H01L (semiconductor devices) as in H04N (pictorial communication). Anyone entering this space competes primarily on die architecture — pixel wells, doped regions, stacking — rather than on downstream image processing, where claim space is comparatively lighter.
A cooling curve, not a dead field
The 2017 peak of 162 filings had already halved by the 2022 midpoint of 105, and the latest year shows just 1 record. Some of that final drop is publication lag rather than a real stop in filing, but the multi-year decline predating it is a genuine signal that the core structural claim space is filling up.
Even the incumbents have gone quiet
Samsung, TSMC, ON Semiconductor, OmniVision, Nikon and Sony all show zero filings in the most recent year, with Samsung and Nikon posting -100% YoY. That is consistent with either a strategic pause while continuation applications work through the pipeline, or with those firms shifting new structural work outside the search terms used here.
Co-filing is thin and inventor-anchored
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, and the strongest links pair a single corporate assignee with named individual inventors rather than with other companies. Cross-company joint filing is not a meaningful feature of this landscape.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cmos image sensor image sensor, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| OmniVision Technologies, Inc. | RHODES HOWARD E | 4 |
| OmniVision Technologies, Inc. | NOZAKI HIDETOSHI | 3 |
| OmniVision Technologies, Inc. | MANABE SOHEI | 3 |
| Eastman Kodak Company | MCCARTEN JOHN P | 3 |
| Eastman Kodak Company | BRADY FREDERICK T | 3 |
| OmniVision Technologies, Inc. | TAI HSIN CHIH | 2 |
| OmniVision Technologies, Inc. | MCCARTEN JOHN P | 2 |
| Eastman Kodak Company | LUO QIANG | 2 |
The strongest co-assignee relationships in this corpus pair one company with individual named inventors rather than with other corporate assignees, indicating structural claims here are filed solo rather than through joint ventures.
Who holds the ground, and where the fence has gaps
Filing activity concentrates among a small set of long-standing sensor manufacturers, but the latest-year momentum data suggests none of them are currently pressing new structural claims in this exact search scope.
The usual leaders have paused
Samsung, TSMC, ON Semiconductor, OmniVision, Nikon and Sony each show zero filings in the most recent year captured here. That does not mean they have exited the technology — it more likely means recent structural work has moved to adjacent classification codes or is still working through the publication pipeline.
Backside-illumination patents still anchor the field
The single most-cited record in this corpus, on backside-illuminated sensor fabrication, carries 379 citations — a reminder that freedom-to-operate review for new BSI work still has to clear patents filed well over a decade ago.
Foundry-side filers remain active
The representative recent record in this dataset comes from Hua Hong Semiconductor, a foundry rather than a fabless sensor house, filing on backside-illumination fabrication method claims — suggesting foundries are picking up structural claim activity that integrated device makers have slowed.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Korea) | 0 | -100% |
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. (TSMC) | 0 | — |
| Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC (ON Semiconductor) | 0 | — |
| OmniVision Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Nikon Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Sony Group Corporation | 0 | — |
| Eastman Kodak Company | 0 | — |
| Apple Inc. | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The trend and ranking data here answer who has filed and where the classification density sits. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision requires drilling into specific claim language.
Check freedom-to-operate against the most-cited records
The five highest-cited patents in this corpus, several dating to the early backside-illumination era, remain the most likely anchors in any FTO search touching pixel structure or BSI fabrication.
Explore citing patents in EurekaTrack the classification gap between H01L and H04N
With structural claims nearly double the volume of signal-processing claims, teams building downstream processing IP may find comparatively more open space than those working on die architecture.
Run a custom IPC breakdown in EurekaWatch foundry-side filers, not just device brands
The most recent representative filing in this dataset comes from a foundry rather than an integrated device manufacturer, hinting that new structural claim activity may increasingly originate from contract fabrication partners.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaCommon questions about CMOS image sensor patents
This dataset's ranking is dominated by long-standing sensor and foundry manufacturers, including Samsung, Sony, TSMC, ON Semiconductor, OmniVision and Nikon, based on 2,197 published patent families. That said, all six of those major assignees show zero filings in the most recent year captured here, so current-day filing leadership within this exact search scope is unsettled. Anyone tracking this space should treat the historical ranking and the latest-year momentum as two separate questions.
No — filing peaked at 162 in 2017 and had already fallen to 105 by 2022, with the most recent year showing only 1 record. Some of that final-year drop reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than a true stop in activity. But the multi-year decline predating the most recent year is a real trend, not a data artefact, and points to a maturing rather than expanding claim landscape.
Backside-illuminated (BSI) sensor patents typically claim the physical arrangement of the substrate, epitaxial layer and doped regions so light reaches the photodiode without first passing through wiring layers — the representative 2023 filing from Hua Hong Semiconductor is a current example. Stacked CIS patents instead claim the bonding and interconnect architecture between separate pixel and logic dies. Both fall under the H01L27/146 and H01L27/148 classification codes tracked in this dataset, but they protect different parts of the fabrication process, so a design can potentially avoid one family of claims while still needing clearance on the other.
H01L (semiconductor devices) is by far the largest, covering 2,134 of the 2,197 families in this dataset, reflecting the focus on sensor die structure. H04N (pictorial communication, i.e. video and TV signal handling) covers 1,154 families, roughly half again fewer. Smaller but relevant classes include G02B (optical elements), G01S (radar and positioning, relevant to sensor-fusion claims) and G03B (photographic apparatus) — each worth checking if a design touches optics or multi-sensor integration.
Citation counts accumulate over time, so older patents in any searched corpus will always show higher totals than recent filings simply because they have had longer to be cited. The top records here, several on backside-illumination fabrication with citation counts in the 300s, were foundational when BSI first displaced front-side illumination as the dominant architecture. High citation counts signal historical influence on subsequent patent drafting, not that the underlying technology is still the most commercially active approach today.
Research CMOS Image Sensor Image Sensor in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cmos image sensor image sensor 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.