LiDAR Miniaturization Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Filings peaked in 2020 at 140 and have since declined, suggesting the core architectural claims for compact scanning modules were staked out early and the field is now consolidating rather than expanding.
- G01S dominates at 780 of 784 records, but the MEMS subclass B81B sits at only 25 — a strong signal that mechanical micro-scanning integration is comparatively under-claimed next to the ranging and detection layers.
- Momentum has cooled even among the most active filers, with several leading assignees posting 0 filings or a -50% to -100% year-over-year change in the latest tracked year.
Filing growth compares 2021 (123 records) with 2024 (41) — 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 784 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 784 patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine LiDAR system claims with solid-state, chip-scale or on-chip integration language, cross-referenced against the core IPC classes for optical ranging (G01S7/481), optical waveguide systems (G02B6/12) and vehicle-mounted ranging (G01S17/931). The scope is deliberately narrow: it is not general LiDAR, but the specific engineering problem of shrinking a LiDAR system’s optics, scanning mechanism and electronics into a compact, manufacturable module.
Filing activity is concentrated in the United States and Europe as receiving offices, with a meaningful share of PCT applications indicating multi-jurisdiction strategy rather than single-market defense. Because publication typically lags filing by around eighteen months, the most recent year in the trend below understates real filing activity and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 784-family dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which technical subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A filing curve that has already peaked
Annual filings rose from 49 in 2017 to a peak of 140 in 2020, then eased to 93 by the 2022 midpoint and continued down toward the low single digits by 2026 (partial year). Read alongside the eighteen-month publication lag, this looks less like a dying field and more like one where the initial land-grab of foundational claims is complete and later filers are working narrower, incremental territory.
Ranging dominates; mechanical integration is thin
G01S (radar, sonar and positioning) appears in 780 of 784 records, confirming this is fundamentally a ranging-system dataset. G02B (optics) at 198 and H01S (lasers) at 92 show where the photonic integration claims concentrate. Notably thin are B81B (MEMS, 25) and G02F (optical modulation, 36) — the mechanical and electro-optic scanning layers that a truly chip-scale module still depends on.
Shares are the percentage of the 784 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on LiDAR System Miniaturization and Integration with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about lidar system miniaturization and integration and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art in this space
Method and device for controlling micro galvanometer of solid-state LiDAR and solid-state LiDAR (US12529765B2)
The application discloses a method and device for controlling a micro galvanometer in a solid-state LiDAR system. It acquires the vertical field-of-view range being scanned, determines first and second vertical angles corresponding to a preset region of interest, and adjusts the slow-axis scanning speed of the galvanometer between preset speeds depending on which portion of the field of view is being scanned — slowing for the region of interest and returning to a faster default speed elsewhere.Filed by Suteng Innovation Technology Co., Ltd. (RoboSense), published 2026-01-20.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20200284883A1 | Component for a lidar sensor system, lidar sensor system, lidar sensor device, method for a lidar sensor syst… | 1,006 |
| 2 | US20170307736A1 | Multi-Wavelength LIDAR System | 358 |
| 3 | US20160049765A1 | Three-dimensional-mapping two-dimensional-scanning lidar based on one-dimensional-steering optical phased arr… | 236 |
| 4 | US20190011567A1 | Light ranging device with MEMS scanned emitter array and synchronized electronically scanned sensor array | 196 |
| 5 | US9310471B2 | Single chip scanning lidar and method of producing the same | 144 |
| 6 | US9753351B2 | Planar beam forming and steering optical phased array chip and method of using same | 142 |
| 7 | US20180059248A1 | Dynamically steered laser range finder | 141 |
| 8 | US20180306925A1 | Wavelength division multiplexed lidar | 131 |
| 9 | US20190011556A1 | Light ranging device with electronically scanned emitter array and synchronized sensor array | 121 |
| 10 | US20180156896A1 | Dynamically steered lidar adapted to vehicle shape | 115 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this corpus and favour older filings; treat them as a measure of influence on later filers, not of present-day 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 numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are put in context.
The land-grab phase is over
Annual filings climbed steadily to a 2020 peak of 140, then declined through the 93-filing 2022 midpoint down to single digits by 2026. Combined with the publication lag, this points to foundational architecture claims being largely staked by 2020-2021, with later activity narrowing to defensive continuations and specific control-method refinements like the galvanometer-speed approach in US12529765B2.
Almost everything is a ranging-system claim
G01S accounts for 780 of 784 records, meaning nearly every filing in this dataset frames its invention as a positioning or ranging system first. Optics (G02B, 198) and lasers (H01S, 92) are secondary framings layered on top, which matters when drafting: examiners in this space will default to ranging-system art as the closest prior art regardless of how photonic the actual innovation is.
MEMS scanning is thinly claimed relative to the rest of the stack
Only 25 of 784 records touch the MEMS subclass B81B, and G02F (optical modulation, 36) is similarly light. For a field whose whole premise is mechanical and optical miniaturization, the actual micro-scanning and beam-steering hardware claims are comparatively sparse next to the ranging-system layer built on top of them.
Even the active filers have slowed
Assignees with meaningful filing history — including Hesai, SOS LAB, Ouster and RoboSense's competitors — show flat or negative year-over-year momentum in the latest tracked year, with several posting zero filings. Co-assignee pairings are also rare (three pairs total across the dataset), indicating most invention here happens inside a single corporate entity rather than through joint development.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to lidar system miniaturization and integration, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where activity has cooled
Filing history in this dataset skews toward automotive LiDAR specialists and their component suppliers, but recent-year momentum has softened across nearly all of them.
Volume leaders are pulling back
Assignees such as Hesai, SOS LAB, LeddarTech-adjacent filers, and Ouster show either a single filing or none at all in the most recent tracked year, a sharp drop from earlier activity. This is consistent with a maturing claim landscape rather than a shrinking market — later-stage players tend to file fewer, narrower continuations once core architecture is locked in.
Joint filings are rare
Only three co-assignee pairings appear across all 784 families, including a university-and-OEM pairing between a Michigan research body and a major automaker's technology arm. Most invention in this space is filed solely by the operating company, which means licensing conversations are more likely to be one-to-one than consortium-based.
Semiconductor and modulation claims are a minority
H01L (semiconductor devices, 45) and G02F (optical modulation, 36) together cover under 11% of the dataset, meaning most filers still frame their miniaturization claims at the system level rather than the chip level. Entrants filing tightly at the semiconductor-integration layer face less crowded prior art than those filing broad ranging-system claims.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Hesai Technology Co., Ltd. | 1 | -50% |
| SOS LAB Co., Ltd. | 1 | -50% |
| OPSYS Technologies | 0 | -100% |
| Suteng Innovation Technology (RoboSense) | 0 | -100% |
| Ouster, Inc. | 0 | — |
| GM Global Technology Operations LLC | 0 | — |
| Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. | 0 | — |
| SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The trend and composition data point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing or new filing.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on MEMS scanning claims
With only 25 records in B81B against 780 in G01S, the mechanical scanning layer is comparatively open. A targeted search before committing to a micro-galvanometer or MEMS mirror design could surface less crowded claim space than the ranging-system layer above it.
Search MEMS LiDAR scanning prior art →Track the leading assignees' next filings closely
Several top filers show a sharp drop in latest-year activity, which historically precedes either a strategic pivot or a wave of continuation filings once a core patent grants. Watching assignee-level filing cadence over the next 12-18 months will clarify which it is.
Set up assignee monitoring in Eureka →Map the citation network around the top five most-cited families
The most-cited records in this dataset, led by a component-and-system family cited over 1,000 times, anchor much of the later filing activity. Understanding what those families actually block clarifies where new claims need to differentiate.
Explore citation mapping in Eureka →Common questions about LiDAR miniaturization patents
This dataset identifies 784 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine LiDAR system claims with solid-state, chip-scale, or on-chip integration language. The search deliberately narrows to compact and integrated architectures rather than general LiDAR, using IPC classes tied to optical ranging, waveguide systems, and vehicle-mounted ranging. Because publication lags filing by roughly eighteen months, the true number of filed-but-unpublished families for 2025-2026 is higher than shown.
No. Filings rose from 49 in 2017 to a peak of 140 in 2020, then declined to 93 by 2022 and continued falling toward single digits by 2026. Even accounting for the publication lag understating the most recent years, the trajectory since 2020 is downward rather than flat. This pattern typically means the foundational architecture claims were filed early and later activity has shifted to narrower, incremental refinements.
The ranging-system framing under IPC class G01S covers 780 of the 784 records in this dataset, making it by far the most crowded claim category. Optics under G02B (198 records) and lasers under H01S (92 records) are secondary but still substantial. Nearly any new filing in this space will be examined against G01S prior art first, regardless of whether the actual innovation is photonic or mechanical.
The MEMS subclass B81B has only 25 records and electro-optic modulation under G02F has 36, both thin relative to the 780-record G01S baseline. This suggests the mechanical micro-scanning hardware and the modulation layer that enables true chip-scale beam steering are comparatively under-claimed compared to the ranging-system logic built on top of them. A first claim in this space might target adaptive-speed control of a micro-galvanometer tied to a specific region-of-interest detection method, similar in structure to the approach in US12529765B2.
Filing activity concentrates among automotive LiDAR specialists and their component suppliers, but recent-year momentum has cooled sharply across nearly all of them, with several posting zero filings or year-over-year declines between 50% and 100% in the latest tracked year. Co-assignee pairings are rare, with only three pairs identified across the entire 784-family dataset, indicating most invention happens inside single corporate entities rather than joint ventures. This combination of high historical volume and low recent momentum suggests the core competitive positions have already been staked out.
Research LiDAR System Miniaturization and Integration in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole lidar system miniaturization and integration 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.