GAA CMP Patent Landscape 2026
The GAA chemical-mechanical planarization patent space is heavily concentrated, with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) and IBM together accounting for the dominant share of a relatively compact corpus of 44 patent families. Activity peaked in 2020 and annual volume has since eased, signaling a maturing but still technically active field with limited new entrants.
TSMC leads a highly concentrated field; IBM is a distant but meaningful second
TSMC holds the top position with 21 patent families, nearly 2.4 times the count of the second-ranked applicant, IBM, at 9 patent families. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) ranks third with 4 patent families, followed by Intel and GlobalFoundries.
The top five filers account for 81% of the combined total across the hundred largest filers, indicating an unusually tight competitive hierarchy. The gap between TSMC and the rest of the field is wide enough to function as a structural barrier for challengers without deep process-integration expertise.
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (TSMC) | 21 | |
| 2 | International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) | 9 | |
| 3 | KOREA ADVANCED INST OF SCI & TECH | 4 | |
| 4 | Intel Corporation | 3 | |
| 5 | GlobalFoundries Inc. | 2 | |
| 6 | Elpis Technologies Inc. | 2 |
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | SHANGHAI INTEGRATED CIRCUIT RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT… | 2 | |
| 8 | Applied Materials, Inc. | 2 | |
| 9 | Semiconductor Manufacturing International (Beijing) Corporation (SMIC Beijing) | 1 | |
| 10 | Semiconductor Manufacturing International (Shanghai) Corporation (SMIC Shanghai) | 1 | |
| 11 | Interuniversity Microelectronics Centre (IMEC) | 1 |
TSMC’s concentration in H01L and H10D subclasses — device fabrication and general semiconductor devices — suggests its portfolio is tightly focused on process integration for GAA structures rather than peripheral tooling. IBM’s portfolio mirrors this focus, signaling that the core intellectual property battleground is at the transistor-architecture level.
The most recent 18–24 months of data are subject to publication lag and likely under-count actual recent filings; apparent low activity in 2025–2026 should not be read as a halt in R&D. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Filing volume peaked in 2020; semiconductor device fabrication dominates the technology mix
Two views frame the competitive dynamics: how annual filing volume has moved over time, and how the technology branches are distributed across the corpus.
Annual filing trend
Filing activity reached its highest recorded annual volume in 2020 with 10 patent families, then fell back. Years 2023–2026 show lower counts, but the most recent period is subject to publication lag and should be treated as a floor rather than a ceiling. The field’s lifecycle evidence places it in a declining phase from its 2020 peak.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
H01L (Semiconductor devices) is the dominant branch, followed by H10D (Semiconductor devices, general). H10B (Memory device manufacture) and H10P each hold smaller but non-trivial shares. B82Y (Nanotechnology applications) and C23C (Coating and surface deposition) are sparsely represented, indicating that process-chemistry and nanomaterial angles remain largely unexplored in this corpus.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Antenna-free high-k gate dielectric for a gate-all…
A gate-all-around field effect transistor may be provided by forming a sacrificial gate structure and a dielectric gate spacer around a middle portion of a semiconductor plate stack. A source region and a drain region may be formed on end portions of semiconductor plates within the semiconductor plate stack. The sacrificial gate structure and other… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Formation of self-limited inner spacer for gate-al… | 114 |
| 2 | Method of forming integrated circuit with gate-all… | 56 |
| 3 | Gate-all-around fets having uniform threshold volt… | 50 |
| 4 | Gate structures for semiconductor devices | 27 |
| 5 | Vertical gate-all-around transistor with top and b… | 21 |
| 6 | Gate-All-Around Device with Protective Dielectric … | 18 |
| 7 | Formation of self-limited inner spacer for gate-al… | 17 |
| 8 | Formation of self-limited inner spacer for gate-al… | 14 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the patent structure means for R&D investment decisions
The combination of high concentration, a post-peak lifecycle, and narrow jurisdiction coverage shapes where new entrants and challengers can realistically create value.
Post-peak field with easing annual volume
The lifecycle evidence classifies GAA CMP as in decline, with annual filings easing back from the 2020 peak. For R&D teams, this suggests that broad structural claims have largely been staked; incremental differentiation or application-specific process variants are more likely avenues than foundational architecture filings. Teams entering now should anticipate a crowded claim landscape in core device-fabrication subclasses.
Lifecycle: DecliningTop five filers hold 81% of the largest-filer pool
The top five filers — TSMC, IBM, KAIST, Intel, and GlobalFoundries — collectively account for 81% of the combined total among the hundred largest filers, a level of concentration that leaves little room for undifferentiated challengers. New entrants such as Intel and Applied Materials have appeared in the recent window, but with small initial footprints. Challengers should target application-layer or materials-layer gaps rather than contesting the core device-architecture space directly.
High ConcentrationMinimal co-filing; SMIC Beijing and SMIC Shanghai are the only observed co-applicants
The only recorded co-filing relationship in the corpus is between SMIC’s Beijing and Shanghai entities, which filed one patent family jointly. The absence of broader cross-institutional co-filing suggests that leading players treat GAA CMP process know-how as proprietary and are not signaling openness to joint development. For a potential entrant, this may indicate a high value for a strategic alliance or licensing arrangement with one of the mid-tier filers such as IMEC or Applied Materials.
Low CollaborationUS-dominant filing; Taiwan and WIPO are marginal
The United States accounts for the overwhelming share of patent records in this corpus, with Taiwan and WIPO (PCT) each contributing a single record. This concentration in the US jurisdiction reflects both the nationality of the leading filers and their choice to anchor protection in the largest semiconductor market. For non-US players, the limited PCT filing activity may represent an enforcement blind spot or a deliberate choice to keep certain process details outside broad international disclosure.
US-CentricGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| Semiconductor Manufacturing International (Beijing) Corporation (SMIC Beijing) | Semiconductor Manufacturing International (Shanghai) Corporation (SMIC Shanghai) | 1 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
TSMC anchors the field; IBM holds a credible second position focused on device architecture
Two players meaningfully separate from the rest of the corpus. TSMC’s portfolio is large and stable; IBM’s is smaller but technically deep across device-fabrication and circuit-integration subclasses.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.
TSMC leads with 21 patent families, concentrated across H01L 21 (semiconductor device fabrication), H01L 29 (transistor structures), and H10D 30 (general semiconductor devices). Its momentum trend is flat at 0% in the recent window, consistent with a mature, well-defended position rather than an active land-grab. The breadth of its IPC coverage signals end-to-end process-integration ownership.
families: 21International Business Machines Corporation
IBM holds 9 patent families, focused on H01L 21, H01L 29, and H01L 27 (integrated circuit structures), indicating a stronger emphasis on circuit-level integration compared to TSMC’s process-fabrication tilt. Momentum data is not separately listed for IBM in the recent-window evidence, but its ranking and technical breadth make it the only filer capable of challenging TSMC’s architectural claims. KAIST, Intel, and GlobalFoundries trail at 4, 3, and 2 patent families respectively.
families: 9| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (TSMC) | 10 | ▬ 0% |
| Intel Corporation | 2 | ▲ new entrant |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 1 | ▲ new entrant |
Memory integration and surface-deposition chemistry are under-served adjacent branches
Three IPC branches appear at the margins of the current GAA CMP corpus. Two carry plausible technical relevance for teams looking to differentiate beyond the dominant device-fabrication zone.
H10B · Memory device manufacture
H10B is represented by 6 patent records and holds a 7% share of the branch distribution — the largest of the sparse branches. GAA transistor architectures are increasingly explored for embedded memory applications (e.g., SRAM bit-cells in gate-all-around configurations), and CMP steps in memory back-end processing differ in selectivity requirements from logic. The current sparse coverage in this branch suggests that memory-specific GAA CMP process flows — particularly for 3D NAND or embedded SRAM — have not been systematically claimed. An entrant with memory-process expertise could file meaningfully differentiated IP in this sub-domain.
Search this in Eureka →C23C · Coating & surface deposition
C23C (Coating and surface deposition) appears only once in the corpus, representing a 1% share. CMP in GAA flows interacts closely with ALD and CVD liner and barrier films; the selectivity of the CMP step depends directly on the deposited film stack. The near-absence of C23C filings suggests that the chemical-process interface between deposition and planarization has not been claimed as an integrated system. Applied Materials, which already holds a footprint in both deposition equipment and CMP, could logically extend into this gap; its recent-entrant status in the corpus may reflect early movement in this direction.
Search this in Eureka →How leading filers differ by technology route across GAA CMP subclasses
Route coverage across the main technology branches in the current evidence set.
| Player | H01L 21 · Semiconductor devices | H01L 29 · Semiconductor devices | H01L 27 · Semiconductor devices | H10D 64 · Semiconductor devices (general) | H10D 30 · Semiconductor devices (general) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (TSMC) | Strong · 21 | Strong · 18 | Moderate · 9 | Strong · 16 | Strong · 16 |
| International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) | Strong · 11 | Strong · 9 | Strong · 6 | Absent | Absent |
| Intel Corporation | Strong · 3 | Strong · 2 | Strong · 2 | Strong · 3 | Strong · 3 |
| Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) | Strong · 4 | Strong · 4 | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| GlobalFoundries Inc. | Strong · 2 | Strong · 2 | Strong · 2 | Strong · 2 | Absent |
| Shanghai Integrated Circuit R&D Center Co., Ltd. | Strong · 2 | Strong · 2 | Strong · 2 | Absent | Absent |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | Strong · 2 | Absent | Absent | Absent | Moderate · 1 |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus comprises 44 patent families in scope. The United States is the dominant filing jurisdiction, with Taiwan and WIPO each accounting for a single patent record.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) leads with 21 patent families, nearly 2.4 times the count of the second-ranked filer, IBM, at 9 patent families.
Annual filing volume peaked in 2020 at 10 patent families and has eased since. The lifecycle evidence classifies the field as in decline from that peak. The most recent 18–24 months are subject to publication lag, so apparent low counts in 2024–2026 should be treated as a floor.
H01L (Semiconductor devices) is the dominant branch, followed by H10D (Semiconductor devices, general). H10B (Memory device manufacture) and H10P hold smaller shares. B82Y (Nanotechnology applications) and C23C (Coating and surface deposition) are each represented by a single patent record.
Collaboration is minimal. The only recorded co-filing relationship is between SMIC’s Beijing and Shanghai entities, which jointly filed one patent family. Leading players appear to treat GAA CMP process know-how as proprietary.
H10B (Memory device manufacture) holds a 7% branch share but remains sparsely claimed relative to its technical relevance — particularly for embedded SRAM and 3D NAND GAA CMP flows. C23C (Coating and surface deposition) is represented by only one patent record, despite the close dependency between deposition film stacks and CMP selectivity in GAA process integration.
Ready to map your own GAA CMP patent landscape?
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
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.