CMP Pad and Conditioning Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One filer holds 24 of 61 records and the top five combined account for 70.5% of everything in scope — this is a field with a narrow gate, not a crowded one.
- Filing peaked in 2017 at nine records and the 2021-to-2024 span shows a 33% decline, though 2025-2026 counts are still filling in under normal publication lag.
- Grinding and polishing (B24B) touches 90.2% of records while composition-side classes like C09G and C08L stay under 15% — most of the claim activity sits on hardware, not chemistry.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (2) — 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 61 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
CMP pad and conditioning technology spans the mechanical side of chemical mechanical planarization: pad groove geometry, diamond dresser wear, break-in time, asperity control and slurry transport across the pad surface. This dataset draws on 61 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, searched against title and claim-description language naming pad conditioning discs, groove design and related wear mechanisms. It is a narrow, mechanically-defined slice of the broader CMP field rather than a survey of slurry chemistry or wafer-level defectivity control.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend understate real filing activity; they should be read as still filling in rather than as a genuine falloff.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 61 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims sit in.
A 2017 peak followed by a thinner decade
Filing activity reached nine records in 2017, its high point across the window. The 2021-to-2024 span, the most recent period that can be treated as complete, shows filings falling from three to two records — a 33% decline. Years after 2024 are still accumulating publications and should not be read as a continued drop.
Hardware dominates the claim space
B24B (grinding and polishing) appears in 90.2% of the 61 records, confirming this is fundamentally a mechanical-process field. H01L (semiconductor devices) and B24D (grinding tools and abrasives) each sit near a quarter of records, reflecting integration and tooling claims layered on top of the core polishing mechanics. Composition-oriented classes — C09G polishing compositions, C08F and C08L polymer chemistry, C08G condensation polymers and C09K specialty materials — each stay under 15% of records, meaning most of the chemistry side of CMP is claimed elsewhere in the broader patent system, not inside this pad-and-conditioning slice.
Shares are the percentage of the 61 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on CMP Pad and Conditioning with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cmp pad and conditioning and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited filings in this space
CMP Polishing Pad and Slurry Composition with Composite Particles
CMP processes, tools and slurries utilize composite particles that include core particles having organosilica particles disposed about the core particles. Using these processes, tools and slurries can enhance removal rates, reduce defectivity and increase cleanability with respect to comparable systems and substrates.Filed by Cabot Corporation, published 2016-03-31 as US20160090513A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6224472B1 | Retaining ring for chemical mechanical polishing | 154 |
| 2 | US5823854A | Chemical-mechanical polish (CMP) pad conditioner | 142 |
| 3 | US5913713A | CMP polishing pad backside modifications for advantageous polishing results | 107 |
| 4 | US5985093A | Chemical-mechanical polish (CMP) pad conditioner | 69 |
| 5 | US20050153634A1 | Negative poisson's ratio material-containing CMP polishing pad | 44 |
| 6 | CN109454547A | 一种用于CMP抛光垫寿命在线检测的系统和方法 | 33 |
| 7 | US20170274496A1 | Debris-removal groove for CMP polishing pad | 20 |
| 8 | WO2015161210A1 | CMP polishing pad with columnar structure and methods related thereto | 20 |
| 9 | WO2014179419A1 | Chemical mechanical planarization slurry composition comprising composite particles, process for removing mat… | 18 |
| 10 | US7252582B2 | Optimized grooving structure for a CMP polishing pad | 18 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 data means for R&D and IP teams
Reading the concentration, trend and citation figures together points to a field that is small, mechanically defined, and already claimed densely at the top.
A narrow gate, not a crowded field
Five assignees account for 43 of the 61 records in scope, and the leader alone holds 24. For a new entrant, this means the core pad-conditioning and groove-design claims are likely already occupied by a small group rather than fragmented across many small filers.
Activity has thinned since the 2017 peak
Filing peaked at nine records in 2017 and has not returned to that level. The 2021-2024 span, the last period with reliable counts, shows a decline from three to two records — worth watching but not yet conclusive given how few records move the percentage at this scale.
Mechanics, not chemistry, drives the claims
The overwhelming majority of records sit in grinding and polishing (B24B), with semiconductor devices (H01L) and abrasive tooling (B24D) as the next largest classes. Composition-side IPC classes each remain under 15% of records, suggesting slurry and polymer chemistry for CMP is largely claimed in adjacent, non-mechanical filings outside this dataset's scope.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cmp pad and conditioning, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space
The ranked leaders in this dataset comprise 29 companies; concentration is steep, and recent-year momentum has slowed across the group.
One filer well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 24 of the 61 records in scope, roughly five times the count of the fifth-placed filer at 3. That gap is unusually wide for a field of this size and signals a defensible core position around pad conditioning and groove design.
A thin tier below the leader
From fifth to tenth place, holdings taper from 3 records down to 2, and together the top 10 account for 91.8% of all 61 records. There is very little room between the leader and the rest of the field — most companies in the ranking hold only a handful of filings each.
Limited but repeated co-filing
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest link appearing four times between two related corporate entities. Most other pairings, including inventor-level pairs, repeat only twice, suggesting collaboration here is occasional rather than a structural feature of the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Rodel Holdings | 0 | — |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | 0 | — |
| Cabot Corporation | 0 | — |
| JH Rhodes Co Inc | 0 | — |
| Cabot Microelectronics Corporation | 0 | — |
| NexPlanar Corporation | 0 | — |
| Araca Inc | 0 | — |
| Ultran Group Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The concentration and technology-mix figures point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, sourcing or white-space filing.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 24 of 61 records and citation leaders dating back to the late 1990s, any new pad-conditioner or groove-geometry design should be checked against that portfolio specifically before development spend commits to a design direction.
Explore the full assignee ranking in EurekaProbe the under-claimed composition classes
C09G, C08F, C08L, C08G and C09K classes each sit under 15% of the 61 records, well below the 90.2% carried by B24B. That gap is worth testing with a targeted prior-art search before assuming it is genuine white space.
Run a targeted search in EurekaTrack whether the 2021-2024 decline continues
The -33% move from 2021 to 2024 is real but based on small counts (3 to 2 records), and 2025-2026 data is still incomplete under normal publication lag. Revisit this trend once another full year of filings has published.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions on CMP pad and conditioning patents
The dataset's assignee ranking covers 29 companies, and it is heavily concentrated: the leading assignee alone holds 24 of the 61 records in scope, with the next four combined bringing the top five to 70.5% of all records. This is a much steeper concentration than many patent fields show, meaning a small number of companies control most of the documented claim space around pad conditioning discs and groove design. Fifth place holds 3 records and tenth place holds 2, so the drop-off below the leader is sharp rather than gradual.
Filing peaked at nine records in 2017 and has not returned to that level since. Looking at the most recent complete span, 2021 to 2024, filings fell from three to two records, a 33% decline, though these are small absolute numbers where one or two filings shift the percentage substantially. Data for 2025 and 2026 is still incomplete because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so it is too early to call the trend a continued decline versus a temporary trough.
Within the 61 records in scope, 90.2% are classified under B24B (grinding and polishing), confirming this is primarily a mechanical-process field covering pad structure, groove geometry and dresser wear. Semiconductor devices (H01L) and grinding tools and abrasives (B24D) each cover roughly a quarter of records, reflecting how pad conditioning claims intersect with wafer processing and tooling. Chemistry-side classes such as polishing compositions (C09G) and polymer chemistry (C08F, C08L, C08G) each stay under 15% of records, so slurry and pad-material chemistry is comparatively under-represented in this specific slice.
The most-cited record in this dataset is US6224472B1, a retaining ring for chemical mechanical polishing, cited 154 times, followed closely by two related pad conditioner patents, US5823854A and US5985093A, and a pad backside modification patent, US5913713A. These are all older filings from the late 1990s, which is expected: citation counts accumulate over time, so long-standing patents in a searched corpus will always show higher citation totals regardless of their current commercial relevance. A more recent notable filing, US20160090513A1 from Cabot Corporation, covers composite-particle CMP slurry and pad compositions.
The clearest signal in this dataset is the gap between the dominant B24B mechanical classification, at 90.2% of records, and the composition-oriented classes like C09G, C08F, C08L, C08G and C09K, each under 15%. That gap suggests slurry transport chemistry, composite-particle pad materials and pad break-in optimisation are comparatively less claimed within this specific pad-and-conditioning search scope than the core mechanical groove and dresser designs are. Any white-space claim should still be checked against the leading assignee's full portfolio, since a single company holds 24 of the 61 records and may already cover adjacent chemistry through separate filings outside this exact search string.
Research CMP Pad and Conditioning in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cmp pad and conditioning 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.