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 →This landscape draws on 44 published records matching laser diode chip and semiconductor laser packaging terms in the title and abstract, cross-referenced against facet coating, junction temperature, beam divergence, VCSEL array and hermetic package claim language, and filtered to IPC classes H01S5, H01L33 and H01S3. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, capturing the period in which edge-emitting and vertical-cavity laser packaging moved from telecom-only applications toward automotive lidar, industrial and lighting use cases.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one or two years in the trend understate real filing activity. Reading the chart against that lag matters more here than in most fields, given the plateau visible from 2022 onward.
Two views of the same 44-record dataset: filing activity by year, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC codes, the composition shares add up to more than 100% of the record total.
Filings rose from 2 records in 2017 to a peak of 6 in 2023, with a flat midpoint at 2022 before that peak. The 2026 count is partial by definition of the data cut-off, and the 2024-2026 tail should be read as undercounted rather than as a genuine drop-off.
Every record carries H01S by construction of the search. Beyond that anchor, G02B (optical elements, 22.7% of records) and F21V (lighting device components, 13.6%) are the largest secondary classes, pointing to packaging and beam-shaping claims that extend past the bare chip into optical assemblies and luminaires.
Shares are the percentage of the 44 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about laser diode chips and packaging and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaDiscloses an airport runway approach lighting apparatus combining a visible light source and an infrared light source, where the infrared source is a laser diode chip carrying an array of semiconductor laser diodes distributed across its surface. A first lens shapes the visible beam into a defined pattern.Filed by KIM, TAE JIN; published 2018-06-07.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6424669B1 | Integrated optically pumped vertical cavity surface emitting laser | 104 |
| 2 | US6054335A | Fabrication of scanning III-V compound light emitters integrated with Si-based actuators | 98 |
| 3 | US6362919B1 | Laser system with multi-stripe diode chip and integrated beam combiner | 67 |
| 4 | US4935939A | Surface emitting laser with monolithic integrated lens | 57 |
| 5 | US8432945B2 | Laser diode combiner modules | 41 |
| 6 | US6580741B2 | Systems with integrated optically pumped vertical cavity surface emitting lasers | 32 |
| 7 | US5247530A | Laser diode module | 26 |
| 8 | US20030007538A1 | Systems with integrated optically pumped vertical cavity surface emitting lasers | 22 |
| 9 | WO2001033678A1 | Method and apparatus for integrated optically pumped vertical cavity surface emitting lasers | 16 |
| 10 | EP1182481A2 | Laser system with multi-stripe diode chip and integrated beam combiner | 14 |
Citation counts inside this corpus skew toward older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations; treat them as a signal of historical influence rather than current relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three readings of the same dataset, each pointing at a different decision: where the field is concentrated, where it is moving, and what the citation record actually tells you.
The leading assignee holds 4 records out of 44 in scope, and the top five combined account for 40.9% of all records. That is meaningful clustering but not dominance — a new entrant with a genuinely differentiated packaging approach is not walking into a field locked up by one player.
Filing volume rose from 2 records in 2017 to a peak of 6 in 2023, but the 2022 midpoint sits at 0 and recent-year momentum by assignee shows several established filers flat or down year-on-year. Combined with the 18-month publication lag, this reads as a mature filing cadence rather than a growth curve.
Beyond the H01S anchor common to every record, the next-largest classes are optical elements (G02B) and lighting device components (F21V), not other semiconductor device classes. That says packaging and beam-delivery claims are where the differentiation is being fought, more than raw chip fabrication.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to laser diode chips and packaging, with the prior art for and against each one.
The ranking covers 24 companies as returned by the data endpoint — not a top-50 or top-100 cut, the full ranked set for this search. Reading it alongside the citation table and the IPC mix shows where a newcomer's claims would actually have to compete.
With the leader at 4 records and fifth place at 3, the gap between the top of the ranking and the rest is narrow. That narrow spread is consistent with a field where packaging know-how is distributed across many players rather than locked behind one company's claim estate.
The United States receives the largest share of filings at 20, with China second at 9. Europe, Japan, WIPO and the UK each receive single-digit counts, indicating that contested prosecution and litigation risk concentrate most heavily in the US docket for this technology.
The top 10 assignees combined account for 68.2% of all 44 records, meaning roughly a third of filings sit outside the most active group, spread across single- or double-digit filers. That tail is where niche packaging or beam-shaping approaches are more likely to sit unchallenged.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| E2O Communications Inc | 0 | — |
| Anhui Genesic Semiconductor Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Kyocera SLD Laser Inc | 0 | — |
| KIM TAE JIN | 0 | — |
| Opnovix Corp | 0 | -100% |
| Axsun Technologies Inc | 0 | — |
| Focuslight Technologies Inc | 0 | — |
| Nanoprecision Products, Inc. | 0 | — |
The dataset points to specific questions worth running deeper before committing engineering or legal resources.
Given that G02B and F21V classes carry meaningful record shares alongside the H01S anchor, a packaging-focused FTO search should not stop at H01S5 alone.
Run a claim search in EurekaSeveral assignees show 0 filings in the latest year with negative year-on-year momentum, which may signal a shift in strategy or a licensing opportunity rather than abandoned technology.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaThe most-cited records date back to the 1990s and early 2000s; verify which of their claims are still in force before assuming they block a new design.
Check patent status in EurekaThe ranked set covers 24 companies, with the leading assignee holding 4 of the 44 records in scope and fifth place holding 3. The top five combined account for 40.9% of all records, which is meaningful clustering but far from a monopoly on the technology. Rather than a single dominant player, the field looks like a moderately concentrated group of specialist laser and optoelectronics firms competing on packaging and beam-delivery approaches.
Filing activity peaked at 6 records in 2023 after rising from 2 records in 2017, but the 2022 midpoint sits at 0 and recent-year momentum by tracked assignees shows mostly flat or declining activity. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2024-2026 tail is likely undercounted rather than a genuine collapse in interest. Read together, the trend looks like a mature, plateaued filing cadence rather than an accelerating one.
The IPC composition shows dense coverage in H01S (lasers) and secondary clustering in G02B (optics) and F21V (lighting components), but thinner representation in B81B (MEMS, 4.5% of records) and in classes tied to hermetic packaging and facet-coating process claims. Those thinner branches are worth a targeted freedom-to-operate check rather than treating them as guaranteed open space. A first claim there would likely need to combine a specific packaging or sealing method with a stated performance parameter, such as a junction-temperature threshold, to differentiate from the existing chip-level art.
The United States receives the largest share of filings among the receiving offices tracked, at 20, followed by China at 9. Europe (EPO) and Japan each receive 4, with WIPO (PCT) at 3 and the UK at 2. That distribution suggests the US is the primary jurisdiction for both prosecution strategy and litigation risk in this field, with China as the clear second market.
The most-cited records in this set date from the late 1980s through early 2000s, including patents on vertical cavity surface emitting laser integration and multi-stripe diode combiners. High citation counts in a searched corpus favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations, so they are a better signal of historical influence on the field than of what is commercially active today. Anyone relying on them for a freedom-to-operate opinion should separately verify current legal status rather than assume continued enforceability.
Go past this page: query the whole laser diode chips and packaging 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.