Laser Mass Transfer Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 12 filings in 2018 mark the peak year so far, with volume tapering rather than compounding through the rest of the window in scope.
- One leader at 18 records sits well clear of a fifth-place assignee at 3 — the ranked field then thins into single-digit and single-filing entrants.
- B41J and B41M dominate the classing at 52.6% and 50.9% of the 57 records respectively, showing this is claimed mainly as a printing process, not a materials category.
What this landscape covers
Laser mass transfer with release layers spans laser induced forward transfer (LIFT), ablation-type release materials, and the donor-substrate mechanics that determine transfer yield, placement accuracy and thermal damage at the pixel or panel level. The search scope pulls records where these process terms co-occur with the manufacturing metrics that matter to an operator — throughput, per-panel yield, release-layer residue — rather than every patent that merely mentions a laser and a coating.
The 57 records in scope run from 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, with publication naturally lagging filing by around 18 months, so the most recent year understates real activity. Receiving-office data shows filing concentrated in the United States and through the PCT route, with Israel, Europe, China and the United Kingdom each contributing smaller but active shares.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 57-record dataset: when the filings happened, and what they were classed as claiming.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Activity opens at 2 records in 2017, rises to a peak of 12 in 2018, then runs down toward 1 in 2026 — a partial year given the publication lag. With fewer than four complete years once that lag is accounted for, no growth rate can be stated from this trend.
IPC subclass composition
B41J (typewriters & printers) and B41M (printing & marking processes) each cover roughly half of the 57 records, confirming the field is framed procedurally around print heads and marking steps. C23C (coating & surface deposition) at 33.3% is the largest materials-side class; B33Y, B29C, B32B, B23K and C12M each sit under 16%, marking narrower application niches such as additive manufacturing, lamination, joining and bioprinting apparatus.
Shares are the percentage of the 57 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Laser Mass Transfer with Release Layers with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about laser mass transfer with release layers and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records
Apparatus and method for printing a viscous substance, by means of laser induced forward transfer, on a product
An apparatus and method for printing a viscous substance, by means of Laser Induced Forward Transfer, on a product, the apparatus comprising a substrate handler with a shaft and substrate carrier, a coater configured for providing a layer of the viscous substance on a first surface of the substrate at a coating position, and a printing device configured for transmitting a beam of electromagnetic radiation to print the viscous substance at a predetermined position on the product.Filed by Keiron Printing Technologies B.V., published 2026-04-02 — one of the most recent entrants in the dataset.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2018193446A1 | System and method for laser induced forward transfer comprising a microfluidic chip print head with a renewab… | 41 |
| 2 | WO2014061024A1 | A multi-technology printing system | 39 |
| 3 | WO2016124708A1 | Continuous process for optimized laser induced forward transfer to create arbitrary patterns | 33 |
| 4 | US20180015671A1 | Recurring process for laser induced forward transfer and high throughput and recycling of donor material by t… | 30 |
| 5 | US9446618B2 | Multi-technology printing system | 17 |
| 6 | US20150239274A1 | Multi-technology printing system | 15 |
| 7 | WO2016124712A2 | Recurring process for laser induced forward transfer and high throughput and recycling of donor material by t… | 14 |
| 8 | US20180050550A1 | Multi-technology printing system | 12 |
| 9 | US20200070514A1 | System and Method for Laser Induced Forward Transfer Comprising a Microfluidic Chip Print Head with a Renewab… | 11 |
| 10 | CN107532275A | 用于激光诱导向前转移且高产量的重复方法、以及通过重新使用多个靶基材板或离散供体点图案的向前转移的供体材料回收 | 11 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate them — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 numbers say
Three findings that shape where to file next and who to watch.
One leader, then a steep drop
The ranked leader holds 18 records against a fifth-place assignee at just 3 and a tenth-place assignee at 1. That gap suggests one organisation has built a broad filing position around the core LIFT process while the rest of the ranked field holds narrower, more specific claims.
Activity peaked early, not late
2018 is the high point in the trend so far, with volume lower in the years since. Combined with the 18-month publication lag on the most recent year, this points to a technology whose foundational claims were staked out mid-decade rather than one still accelerating.
Claimed as a print process, not a material
More than half of the 57 records sit in printer/printhead classes (B41J) and printing/marking process classes (B41M), while coating and surface deposition (C23C) covers a third. Additive manufacturing, lamination and bioreactor applications each remain under 16%, marking them as narrower, less contested niches within the same core technique.
Collaboration is rare and mostly institutional
Only three co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, the strongest linking a single corporate group's US and related entities at 12 shared records. The other two pairs link a university research institute with an individual inventor, and a university with an industry partner — evidence of academic-industry links rather than broad industry consortia.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to laser mass transfer with release layers, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is open
The ranked assignees span specialist bioprinting and microfabrication firms, an equipment maker, government research bodies and a university research institute — a mix that points to a field still anchored in specialist and research-adjacent filers rather than large diversified electronics manufacturers.
A broad early filing position
The top-ranked assignee's record count is more than double that of any competitor lower in the ranking, indicating a filing strategy built around covering the core LIFT apparatus and process claims broadly rather than a single narrow application.
A thin but present mid-tier
From fifth place down, record counts drop into low single digits, consistent with specialist equipment makers and research institutes each protecting a specific configuration or application rather than the whole process chain.
Recent activity is thin across the board
Most ranked assignees show zero filings in the latest year in the dataset, with only one recording a single filing; this is consistent with the publication lag understating true recent activity rather than a sign the field has gone quiet.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Jihua Laboratory | 1 | — |
| PRECISE BIO INC | 0 | — |
| PHOTON JET | 0 | — |
| Precise Bio 3D Ltd | 0 | -100% |
| Mycronic AB | 0 | — |
| The Government of the United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services | 0 | — |
| INST OF COMM & COMP SYST ICCS NAT TECHNICAL UNIV OF ATHENS NTUA | 0 | — |
| Shenzhen Samcien New Materials Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, a filing strategy, or scouting for partners.
Map the leader's full claim scope
With 18 records against a fifth-place count of 3, understanding exactly what the ranked leader has claimed — apparatus, process steps or materials — is the first freedom-to-operate step before filing anywhere in this space.
Explore the assignee's portfolio in EurekaTrack the under-claimed branches
Residue removal, placement-accuracy feedback and bio-substrate release formulations sit outside the dominant printer/printing classes and may offer cleaner filing room.
Run a white-space search in EurekaWatch for post-lag filing activity
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the thin recent-year momentum shown here likely understates work already filed but not yet published.
Set up a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
Laser induced forward transfer (LIFT) uses a laser pulse to release material from a donor substrate — often through a sacrificial or release layer — and deposit it onto a target substrate at a precise location. It differs from mechanical or electrostatic mass-transfer methods because it does not require physical contact with the receiving substrate, which is part of why the patent claims in this dataset concentrate so heavily on placement accuracy and thermal damage control. The release layer's job is to absorb or redirect the laser energy so the transferred material itself is not damaged, and much of the claimed technology in this space covers exactly that layer's composition and behaviour.
The assignee ranking in this dataset covers 14 companies and research bodies, with one clear leader holding 18 records — more than double the count of the fifth-ranked assignee at 3. The field below that leader includes specialist bioprinting and microfabrication firms, an industrial printing equipment maker, and government and university research bodies, rather than large diversified electronics manufacturers. This pattern suggests the technology is still largely held by specialists and research institutions rather than having been absorbed into big-company patent portfolios.
Filing activity in the dataset peaked in 2018 at 12 records, having started at 2 in 2017, and has generally run lower in the years since through the 2026 data cut-off. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one or two years in any such trend will always look lower than actual filing activity turns out to be once those applications publish. Readers should treat the apparent decline after 2018 as a floor, not a confirmed slowdown.
The two largest IPC subclasses are B41J (typewriters and printers) and B41M (printing and marking processes), covering 52.6% and 50.9% of the 57 records in scope respectively — meaning this technology is predominantly classed as a printing process. C23C (coating and surface deposition) is the largest materials-oriented class at 33.3%, while additive manufacturing (B33Y), plastics shaping (B29C), laminates (B32B), welding/soldering (B23K) and bioreactor apparatus (C12M) each cover under 16% of records, marking narrower application niches within the same core technique.
Based on the IPC composition, the smaller classes — additive manufacturing, laminate structures, welding/soldering-adjacent joining, and bioreactor apparatus — each sit under 16% of the 57 records, well below the dominant printer and printing-process classes. Specific under-claimed branches include donor-layer residue removal after transfer, real-time placement-accuracy feedback control, release-layer formulations aimed at biological substrates, and pulse-shaping approaches to limit thermal damage. These branches sit adjacent to the heavily filed core process claims and may carry lighter prior art for a new entrant.
Research Laser Mass Transfer with Release Layers in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole laser mass transfer with release layers 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.