Quantum Dot Display Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
A data-backed look at quantum dot display patents: who holds the concentrated filing share, how filing volume has moved since 2017, and where the IPC classes show under-claimed white space.
Filing growth = 2021 (498 records) → 2024 (210); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 4,825 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What the quantum dot display patent record shows
Quantum dot display technology sits at the intersection of semiconductor materials, optical modulation and display panel engineering, and the patent record reflects that spread: records in this dataset carry classifications across eight distinct IPC subclasses, from core semiconductor device structures to lighting components and nanotechnology-specific materials claims. The filing pattern is not evenly distributed. A small group of assignees accounts for roughly half of everything filed, which means most technical routes into the field are already claimed by a handful of large display manufacturers rather than open to a long tail of independent entrants.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-08-31 cut-off, giving a decade-long view of when filing accelerated, where it peaked, and which receiving offices carried the bulk of the activity.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 4,825-record dataset: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the technical weight.
Filing rose sharply, peaked in 2019, then pulled back
Annual filings climbed from 404 records in 2017 to a peak of 591 in 2019. The 2021-to-2024 window, the most recent span that can be read as complete once publication lag is accounted for, shows filings falling from 498 to 210 — a 58% decline. Figures from 2025 onward are still filling in and should not be read as a continuation of that decline.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Semiconductor and optical-modulation classes dominate
H01L (semiconductor devices) appears on 34.7% of records and G02F (optical control and modulation) on 30.4%, with H10K (organic semiconductors, including OLED-adjacent structures) close behind at 27.9%. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum to well over 100% of the 4,825-record base — they describe overlap in claim scope, not a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 4,825 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Displays & Optoelectronics: Quantum Dot Display Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about displays & optoelectronics: quantum dot display patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative filing and the most-cited records
Quantum dot display panel, quantum dot display device, and preparation method thereof (US11803079B2)
The patent covers a quantum dot display panel built from an array substrate and a color film substrate with liquid crystal between them, where the color film substrate stacks a cover plate, light-cutoff layer, quantum dot pixel layer, blocking layer, reflection layer, coating layer, built-in polarizing layer, isolation unit and polyimide layer.Filed by Wuhan China Star Optoelectronics Technology, published 2023-10-31.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160307189A1 | System, method, and apparatus for a dynamic transaction card | 369 |
| 2 | US20170154328A1 | Dynamic transaction card protected by gesture and voice recognition | 356 |
| 3 | US9978058B2 | System, method, and apparatus for a dynamic transaction card | 288 |
| 4 | US20130242228A1 | Liquid crystal display and manufacturing method thereof | 267 |
| 5 | WO2017149526A2 | A method and apparatus for cooperative usage of multiple distance meters | 252 |
| 6 | WO2016168394A1 | A system, method, and apparatus for a dynamic transaction card | 239 |
| 7 | US20090314991A1 | Quantum dot ink composition for inkjet printing and electronic device using the same | 237 |
| 8 | US20130016292A1 | Eyepiece for near-to-eye display with multi-reflectors | 234 |
| 9 | US8786686B1 | Head mounted display eyepiece with integrated depth sensing | 219 |
| 10 | US20170153382A1 | Quantum dot composite material and manufacturing method and application thereof | 180 |
Citation counts favour older, earlier-published records inside this searched corpus; treat them as a signal of influence within the field rather than a measure of current technical importance.
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 concentration and composition mean for filing strategy
Three figures from this dataset carry direct implications for anyone deciding where to file next or who to watch.
Filing share sits with a small group
Just five assignees account for 48.2% of all 4,825 records in scope, and the top ten extend that to 60.7%. That level of concentration means most core structural claims around quantum dot display panels are already occupied by large display manufacturers, and new entrants are more likely to find room in adjacent processing or materials claims than in core panel architecture.
Volume has pulled back from its 2019 peak
Filing peaked at 591 records in 2019 and published volume in the 2021-to-2024 window fell 58%, from 498 to 210. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence the field is cooling further.
Nanotechnology-specific claims are comparatively sparse
While H01L and G02F cover roughly a third of records each, B82Y — the IPC subclass specific to nanotechnology applications — appears on only 5.2% of the 4,825 records. Given that quantum dots are inherently nanomaterials, this gap suggests many filings claim the display architecture around the dots rather than the nanomaterial synthesis or structure itself.
Corporate group filing patterns are visible in co-assignee data
The strongest co-assignee pairing in this dataset shares 96 records, consistent with a parent-subsidiary filing structure rather than an arm's-length collaboration. Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear at all, indicating that joint filing across unrelated organisations is rare in this field.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to displays & optoelectronics: quantum dot display patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions worth running before committing filing budget.
Map the white space inside G02B and F21V
G02B (optical elements) and F21V (lighting components) sit well below the top classes at 12.9% and 9.4% of records. Both intersect with quantum dot display work but carry lighter claim density, which is worth checking against your own technical roadmap before assuming the space is occupied.
Explore optical and lighting claimsTrack the concentrated leaders' recent filings
With 60.7% of records held by the top ten assignees, understanding what those organisations are filing now — not just historically — is more useful than a broad field scan for anyone assessing freedom to operate.
Review leader filing activityRe-run the trend once 2025-2026 data settles
Publication lag means the most recent two years understate real filing activity. A follow-up check in twelve months will give a clearer read on whether the 2021-2024 decline continued or reversed.
Revisit the filing trendCommon questions about quantum dot display patents
Filing in this field is concentrated: the top five assignees together hold 48.2% of the 4,825 records in scope, and the top ten hold 60.7%. This means a small number of large display manufacturers control most of the core claim space, rather than filings being spread across many smaller players. Anyone assessing freedom to operate should start with those leaders rather than scanning the full ranked list, since the long tail beyond the top ten contributes a comparatively small share each.
Filing peaked in 2019 at 591 records and has declined since, with published volume falling 58% between 2021 and 2024 (from 498 to 210 records). However, publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and cannot be used to conclude the field is still shrinking. A fair read is that the field passed its filing peak in 2019 and has cooled through the most recently complete data year, 2024.
The two largest IPC subclasses are H01L (semiconductor devices), appearing on 34.7% of the 4,825 records, and G02F (optical control and modulation), on 30.4%. H10K, which covers organic semiconductors including OLED-adjacent structures, appears on 27.9% of records. Because records often carry multiple classifications, these shares overlap rather than partition the field, reflecting how quantum dot display work spans materials science, optics and display circuitry simultaneously.
The IPC composition data points to two comparatively lighter branches: B82Y (nanotechnology applications), on only 5.2% of records, and G09G (display control circuits), on 9.2%. Given that quantum dots are themselves nanomaterials, the low B82Y share suggests most filings claim the surrounding display architecture rather than the nanomaterial structure or synthesis itself — a route with visibly less claim density than the core semiconductor and optical classes.
US11803079B2, filed by Wuhan China Star Optoelectronics Technology and published 2023-10-31, claims a specific layered quantum dot display panel structure: an array substrate and color film substrate sandwiching liquid crystal, with the color film substrate itself built from a defined stack including a light-cutoff layer, quantum dot pixel layer, blocking layer, reflection layer and polyimide layer. It blocks that specific layer sequence and material combination, not quantum dot displays generally — a design that varies the layer order, materials or omits specific layers such as the built-in polarizing layer would sit outside its literal claim scope, though a full freedom-to-operate check would need claim-by-claim analysis.
Research Displays & Optoelectronics: Quantum Dot Display Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole displays & optoelectronics: quantum dot display patent 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.