Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/diamond-and-aluminium-nitride-wafers-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Compound Semiconductor SubstratesDiamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafer Patents: Leaders, Filing Trends and Open Ground
- 48.8% concentration. The five leading assignees hold 600 of the 1,230 records in scope — the field is a concentrated race, not a fragmented one.
- Filing plateau, not decline. The complete-year window shows 2021 at 38 filings against 2024 at 36, a -5% move — flat, given publication lag on the most recent years.
- Crystal growth dominates the claim map. C30B (crystal growth) covers 58.3% of records, more than H01L device claims and C23C coating claims combined for many filers.
1,230
Published Records
49%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-5%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (38 records) with 2024 (36) — 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 1,230 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 1,230 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine single-crystal diamond or aluminium nitride substrate claims with heteroepitaxial growth, thermal spreading, nitrogen impurity control, wafer-size scaling, surface preparation or device bonding. It spans crystal growth, semiconductor device integration and coating chemistry — the three IPC subclasses that together account for most of the filing activity in the field. Patent families, not raw document counts, are used throughout the ranking so that continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplicates do not distort who is actually ahead.
Coverage runs to a 2026-07-31 cut-off. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the last one to two years in any trend chart will understate real filing activity — a fact worth keeping in mind before reading the most recent years as a slowdown.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Data
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,230 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings peaked at 75 in 2017 and have since settled into a lower, comparatively flat band; the most defensible recent comparison is 2021 (38) against 2024 (36), a -5% move over three complete years. Years after 2024 are still filling in under the publication lag and should not be read as a further decline.
IPC subclass composition
C30B (crystal growth) leads at 58.3% of the 1,230 records, followed by H01L (semiconductor devices) at 32.2% and C23C (coating and surface deposition) at 27.2%. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these shares sum to well over 100% and should be read as claim-space overlap, not as a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,230 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about diamond and aluminium nitride wafers and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Representative filing and most-cited prior art
Representative Record
Base material for growing single crystal diamond and method for producing single crystal diamond substrate
SHIN-ETSU CHEMICAL CO., LTD.
A base material for growing single-crystal diamond built from a single-crystal silicon substrate with a heteroepitaxially grown MgO film, topped with a heteroepitaxially grown iridium or rhodium film. The stack is claimed to grow single-crystal diamond over a larger area with improved crystallinity, producing a higher-quality diamond substrate at lower cost.Filed by Shin-Etsu Chemical, published 2013-08-29 — a template for the buffer-stack approach that recurs across later heteroepitaxial diamond growth filings in this dataset.
Most-cited records in this landscape
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6579833B1 | A process for converting a metal carbide to carbon on the surface of the metal carbide by etching in halogens | 602 |
| 2 | US20030119279A1 | Three dimensional device integration method and integrated device | 312 |
| 3 | US7126212B2 | Three dimensional device integration method and integrated device | 300 |
| 4 | US8921473B1 | Image making medium | 272 |
| 5 | US6381022B1 | Light modulating device | 272 |
| 6 | US9431368B2 | Three dimensional device integration method and integrated device | 233 |
| 7 | US5951543A | Delivery system and method for surgical laser | 217 |
| 8 | US6864585B2 | Three dimensional device integration method and integrated device | 199 |
| 9 | US6582513B1 | System and method for producing synthetic diamond | 180 |
| 10 | US6500694B1 | Three dimensional device integration method and integrated device | 168 |
Citation counts accumulate over time inside this corpus, so older records are structurally favoured — treat the ranking as a signal of influence on later filers, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the IPC composition are read together.
Concentration
48.8% of 1,230
held by top 5 assignees
The lead group is narrow
The five leading assignees combined account for 600 of the 1,230 records in scope, and the top ten extend that to 61.4% (755 records). A gap this wide between the leader (167 records) and fifth place (50) signals that any new entrant is filing into ground already staked out by a small group, not a fragmented field.
Assignee ranking, 100 companies
Momentum
-5% (2021→2024)
three-year filing change
A plateau, not a retreat
Filings held close to flat between 2021 (38) and 2024 (36), the last window unaffected by publication lag. Several of the largest assignees show zero filings in the latest recorded year, but that pattern is consistent with lag rather than a genuine pullback from the technology.
Complete-year filing counts
Claim density
58.3% of records
carry a C30B crystal-growth class
Growth-process claims crowd the centre
C30B crystal growth claims sit on well over half of all 1,230 records, well ahead of H01L device integration (32.2%) and C23C coating (27.2%). New growth-process claims are entering a dense prior-art field; device-integration and coating claims have comparatively more room.
IPC subclass shares, all records
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to diamond and aluminium nitride wafers, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where organisations file together
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd. | Kanazawa University | 31 |
| Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd. | National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) | 24 |
| Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd. | Sumitomo Electric Hardmetal Corp. | 20 |
| SCARSBROOK GEOFFREY ALAN | FRIEL IAN | 20 |
| TWITCHEN DANIEL JAMES | MARTINEAU PHILIP MAURICE | 19 |
| National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) | Kanazawa University | 15 |
| TWITCHEN DANIEL JAMES | SCARSBROOK GEOFFREY ALAN | 15 |
| Element Six Ltd | TWITCHEN DANIEL JAMES | 11 |
The strongest co-assignee pairing in this dataset links a chemical materials company with a university partner, and a second links the same company with a national research institute — a pattern consistent with growth-substrate work still running through joint academic-industry programmes rather than purely in-house R&D.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who holds the claim space
The ranked leaders are drawn from materials companies, electronics manufacturers and national research institutes, with the top of the list dominated by a small number of long-running diamond and compound-semiconductor specialists.
Leader
167 records
single largest filer
A clear front-runner
The leading assignee's 167 records sit well ahead of fifth place at 50, a gap wide enough to suggest an entrenched position built over years rather than a recent surge.
Assignee ranking, 100 companies
Second tier
50 to 24 records
fifth through tenth place
A workable but occupied mid-field
Positions five through ten range from 50 down to 24 records — still substantial filing programmes, but ones a new entrant could realistically outpace with a focused campaign rather than needing decades of prior filings.
Assignee ranking, 100 companies
Momentum
0 filings
latest year, several top assignees
Recent-year figures need the lag caveat
Multiple assignees among the largest filers show zero filings in the most recent recorded year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this reads as pipeline still filling in rather than firms exiting the technology.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Element Six Ltd | 0 | — |
| Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Element Six Technologies Ltd | 0 | -100% |
| Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) | 0 | — |
| Apollo Diamond, Inc. | 0 | — |
| TWITCHEN DANIEL JAMES | 0 | — |
| Canon Inc. | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a concentrated leadership group, a flat-to-plateaued filing trend and several thinner sub-branches. Turning that into a filing or licensing decision means going deeper on specific claims and specific competitors.
Map claims against a specific process route
Compare the crystal-growth claim language in the densest C30B filings against a target process to see which steps are genuinely blocked versus merely adjacent.
Explore claim mapping in Eureka →Track the leading assignees' pipeline
Follow filing activity from the top-ranked assignees forward as later years publish, to see whether the 2021-2024 plateau holds or resumes growth.
Set up assignee monitoring in Eureka →Test white-space claim drafts
Draft a first claim around one of the under-claimed sub-areas and check it against the full corpus before committing R&D spend.
Run a novelty check in Eureka →Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on diamond and AlN wafer patents
The ranking is led by a single assignee with 167 records, well ahead of the rest of the field, with the top five combined holding 600 of the 1,230 records in scope (48.8%). The leading names span diamond materials specialists, Japanese electronics and chemical manufacturers, and national research institutes. This concentration means a new entrant is competing against established filing programmes rather than a wide-open field, so freedom-to-operate work should focus first on the leading group's claim language.
Filing peaked at 75 in 2017 and has since settled lower, but the most reliable recent comparison — 2021 at 38 filings against 2024 at 36 — shows only a -5% change, essentially a plateau. Years after 2024 appear to drop further in the raw trend, but that is largely an artefact of the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication, not a genuine falloff. Reading the last one to two years as a decline would be a misinterpretation of the data.
The dominant class is C30B, crystal growth, which appears on 58.3% of the 1,230 records — more than any other single class. H01L (semiconductor devices) covers 32.2% and C23C (coating and surface deposition) covers 27.2%. Because records commonly carry more than one IPC code, these percentages overlap rather than partition the field, and the overlap itself is informative: many filings combine a growth-process claim with a device or coating claim in the same document.
US20130220214A1, assigned to Shin-Etsu Chemical, claims a base material for growing single-crystal diamond that uses a silicon substrate with heteroepitaxially grown MgO and iridium or rhodium films. It is a buffer-stack approach aimed at growing larger-area, higher-crystallinity diamond at lower cost. Anyone using a comparable oxide-plus-noble-metal buffer stack on silicon for diamond heteroepitaxy should check this filing specifically, though alternative buffer chemistries or substrate materials may sit outside its claims.
Relative to the dense C30B crystal-growth core, sub-areas such as wafer-size scaling beyond current diamond boule diameters, nitrogen impurity control for optical-grade diamond, and direct bonding of diamond to power device substrates carry comparatively thinner filing density. This does not mean these areas are unclaimed, but that the claim space is less crowded than core growth-process claims. A first claim in these branches should still be checked against the specific leading assignees active there before drafting.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Diamond and Aluminium Nitride Wafers in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole diamond and aluminium nitride wafers 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.