Photonic Wire Bonding Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
Filing growth compares 2021 (17 records) with 2024 (11) — 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 153 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the photonic wire bonding patent record shows
Photonic wire bonding links separately fabricated photonic chips with freeform, laser-written waveguides rather than relying on precision-aligned mechanical connectors. The approach matters because alignment tolerance, not raw waveguide loss, is what has kept many silicon photonics assemblies out of high-volume production. The patent record in scope spans 2015 through mid-2026 and covers 153 published records, drawing on optical elements, modulation, laser and transmission classifications together with dedicated photonic wire bonding and optical wire bonding search terms.
Filing activity built steadily from 2017, peaked in 2023 at 31 records, and has since eased — though the two most recent years are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. Reading the trend past 2024 as a decline would be premature; what is clear is that the field moved from early academic-style filing into a period of denser, more contested claim activity around 2022-2023.
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
153 records in scope, drawn from receiving offices led by the United States, EPO and WIPO PCT filings, break down by year and by IPC subclass as follows.
Filings rose through 2023 before the most recent, still-incomplete years
Annual filings climbed from 9 in 2017 to a peak of 31 in 2023. The 2021-to-2024 span shows an 11-record year against a 17-record year, a 35% pullback, but 2025 and 2026 figures will rise as later-filed applications publish.
Optical elements and systems claims dominate the class mix
G02B (optical elements and systems) appears in 59.5% of the 153 records, well ahead of G02F modulation (14.4%), H04B transmission (13.7%) and H01S lasers (13.1%). Smaller shares in material analysis, digital processing, addition polymers and antennas point to adjacent claim activity rather than core contest.
Shares are the percentage of the 153 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Integrated Photonics — Photonic Wire Bonding Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about integrated photonics — photonic wire bonding patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited foundational filings
Low refractive index resin composition for TPP nano 3D printing and photonic wire bonding
Filed as US20250004199A1, this record describes a fluorinated, low refractive index resin composition carrying a (meth)acrylic reactive group with sufficient solvency for a photoinitiator used in two-photon polymerization (TPP) nano 3D printing. The formulation is aimed at printing micro-scale single-mode waveguide cores and surrounding cladding directly, supporting a photonic wire bonding process for assembling photonic integrated circuits.Material-level claim rather than a device or system claim — the resin chemistry is the asset, not the waveguide layout.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US11320588B1 | Super system on chip | 134 |
| 2 | US20130223788A1 | Photonic wire bonds | 58 |
| 3 | US9034222B2 | Method for producing photonic wire bonds | 51 |
| 4 | US20130221550A1 | Method for producing photonic wire bonds | 47 |
| 5 | US8903205B2 | Three-dimensional freeform waveguides for chip-chip connections | 41 |
| 6 | US11892746B1 | Super system on chip | 40 |
| 7 | US20180180818A1 | Optical Edge Coupler with Controllable Mode Field for Photonic Chip | 30 |
| 8 | US20180017748A1 | A method and apparatus for interconnecting photonic circuits | 30 |
| 9 | US20250094380A1 | Super system on chip | 27 |
| 10 | US20180259710A1 | Wafer-Scale Polymer-Aided Light Coupling for Epitaxially Grown Material Platforms | 24 |
Citation counts reward older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within this corpus; treat them as a measure of influence on the field, not of current commercial relevance.
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 filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once family counts, IPC composition and citation weight are read together.
A narrow leadership group, not a fragmented field
The five leading assignees together hold 60 of the 153 records in scope. That is enough concentration that a new entrant's freedom-to-operate review should start with those portfolios specifically, rather than treating the field as evenly spread across dozens of small filers.
Optical elements and systems is the contested core
Nearly six in ten records touch G02B, covering waveguide structures and freeform optical elements. Modulation (G02F), transmission (H04B) and laser (H01S) classes each sit well below that, at 13-14% apiece — evidence that the interconnect geometry itself, not the surrounding electronics, is where claim pressure concentrates.
Growth has cooled from its 2023 peak
Filings rose from 17 in 2021 to a peak of 31 in 2023, then eased to 11 by 2024 — a 35% pullback across that three-year window. The two most recent years are still filling in as later applications publish, so this should be read as a cooling from peak intensity, not as evidence the field is winding down.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to integrated photonics — photonic wire bonding patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, white-space filing, or tracking a competitor.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the top holders
With 39.2% of records held by five assignees, any new geometry or alignment-method filing should be screened against those portfolios before drafting claims.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaProbe the resin-chemistry and cladding branches
Material-composition claims around TPP printing resins and cladding formulations show thinner density than the core waveguide-bonding geometry space.
Search white space in EurekaTrack recent-year filers, not just historic leaders
Some of the largest historic portfolios show no publications in the latest year, while smaller, equipment-focused filers keep filing steadily — worth separate monitoring.
Set up assignee alerts in EurekaFrequently asked questions
Photonic wire bonding is a technique for connecting separately fabricated photonic chips using freeform, laser-written waveguides instead of precision mechanical alignment. It matters because chip-to-chip alignment tolerance, rather than waveguide propagation loss alone, has been a major barrier to scaling silicon photonics assemblies into volume manufacturing. The patent record shows steady filing growth from 2017 through a 2023 peak, indicating sustained industrial interest in solving this interconnect problem.
The ranked leaders are concentrated: the top five assignees together hold 60 of the 153 records in scope, or 39.2% of the field, and the top ten hold 62.7%. This is a ranked list of 45 companies returned by the dataset, not a top-50 or top-100 list, so smaller filers beyond the leaders each hold only a handful of records. A freedom-to-operate review should prioritise the leading portfolio holders first.
Filings grew from 9 in 2017 to a peak of 31 in 2023, then eased to 11 by 2024, a 35% decline across the 2021-to-2024 window. The two most recent years in the dataset are still incomplete because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so it is too early to call this a sustained slowdown. The safest reading is that the field cooled from an unusually active 2022-2023 period rather than that interest is declining.
G02B, covering optical elements and systems, appears in 59.5% of the 153 records and is by far the densest classification in the field. Modulation-related G02F, transmission-related H04B and laser-related H01S each sit around 13-14% of records, showing meaningful but secondary claim activity. Smaller shares appear in material testing, digital processing, polymer chemistry and antenna classes, marking adjacent rather than core territory.
The thinner branches relative to the dominant optical-elements claims include low-refractive-index resin chemistry for two-photon-polymerization printing, waveguide cladding material formulations, and automated multi-chip alignment metrology. These areas carry lower record counts than the core waveguide-bonding geometry claims held by the leading assignees, suggesting more room to file a defensible first claim. Any filing strategy here should still be checked against the leading portfolios' broader claim scope.
Research Integrated Photonics — Photonic Wire Bonding Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole integrated photonics — photonic wire bonding 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.