Light Sheet Imaging Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees together account for 31.8% of the 1,501 records in scope, and the leading ten reach 47.0% — a field where a handful of institutions hold outsized claim positions.
- Growth has cooled, not collapsed. Filings ran from 127 in 2021 to 107 in 2024, a 16% pullback over that span, after peaking at 130 in 2022 — publication lag means 2025-2026 figures will still rise as filings catch up.
- Optics and biology overlap heavily. G02B (optical elements) and G01N (material analysis) each cover close to half of all records, while C12Q (enzyme/DNA measurement) touches 21.2% — evidence that light sheet claims increasingly sit at the imaging-genomics boundary.
Filing growth compares 2021 (127 records) with 2024 (107) — 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 1,501 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the light sheet and volumetric imaging patent record shows
Light sheet microscopy and related volumetric imaging methods have moved from a specialist optics technique into a filing category that spans optical hardware, sample preparation and downstream data processing. The 1,501 records in scope span 2015 through mid-2026, capturing everything from selective plane illumination hardware to clearing protocols and dual-view fusion software that reconstructs 3D volumes from multiple angles. Sheet thickness, sample mounting and photobleaching recur as claim elements because they are the practical bottlenecks that separate a working instrument from a lab demonstration.
Filing activity is not evenly spread. A small set of research universities and instrument makers hold a disproportionate share of the record, while genomics and spatial-biology entrants have layered claims on top of the original optics base — a sign that the applications driving new filings have shifted from pure imaging toward imaging-enabled biological assay.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,501-record corpus: the pace of filing over time, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, the composition shares add up to more than 100%.
A decade of filing, with a 2022 peak
Annual filings climbed from 112 in 2017 to a peak of 130 in 2022, then eased to 107 by 2024 — a 16% decline across 2021-2024. 2025 and 2026 figures will understate true activity because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months.
Optics and analysis dominate, genomics is rising
G02B (optical elements & systems) and G01N (material analysis & testing) each appear in close to half of all records. C12Q (enzyme/DNA measurement) reaches 21.2%, and G06T (image processing) sits at 11.0% — together indicating that computational reconstruction and biological assay are now first-class claim territory, not afterthoughts to the optical path.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,501 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Light Sheet and Volumetric Imaging with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about light sheet and volumetric imaging and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records anchoring this field
Tiling light sheet selective plane illumination microscopy with real-time optimized light sheet
Disclosed are a method and apparatus for tiling light sheet selective plane illumination microscopy (TLS-SPIM) with real-time light sheet optimization. The method and apparatus image multi-cellular specimens in 3D, with an improved 3D imaging ability of SPIM in resolving complex structures and optimizes SPIM live imaging performance by using a real-time adjustable tiling light sheet and creating a flexible compromise between spatial and temporal resolution. A 3D live imaging ability is provided of the TLS-SPIM by real-time imaging cellular and sub-cellular behaviors.Filed by The Research Foundation for the State University of New York, published 2018-02-15 as US20180045941A1.
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160327779A1 | Systems And Methods for Three Dimensional Imaging | 329 |
| 2 | US20170176338A1 | Spectrally And Spatially Multiplexed Fluorescent Probes For In Situ Cell Labeling | 190 |
| 3 | US20210262018A1 | Methods and compositions for integrated in SITU spatial assay | 189 |
| 4 | US20090250729A1 | Capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer and manufacturing method | 185 |
| 5 | US20130286181A1 | Structured plane illumination microscopy | 179 |
| 6 | WO2019199579A1 | Method of in SITU gene sequencing | 160 |
| 7 | US10495554B2 | Method and system for imaging and analysis of a biological specimen | 156 |
| 8 | WO2015109323A2 | Systems and methods for three-dimensional imaging | 156 |
| 9 | US10457980B2 | Multiplex labeling of molecules by sequential hybridization barcoding | 155 |
| 10 | US10510435B2 | Error correction of multiplex imaging analysis by sequential hybridization | 154 |
Citation counts reflect influence inside the searched corpus and favour older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
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 →Reading the numbers
Three findings that shape how a freedom-to-operate or whitespace review of this field should be structured.
The top of the field is genuinely concentrated
Five assignees hold 477 of the 1,501 records in scope, and the leading ten reach 706 records (47.0%). That is a narrower base than the raw filer count suggests — most of the 100 ranked assignees hold only a handful of families each.
Growth has eased from its 2022 peak, not reversed
Filings peaked at 130 in 2022 and settled to 107 by 2024, a 16% pullback across that three-year window. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025-2026 counts are provisional and will rise as records continue to publish.
Biology-side claims are now embedded in the optics
Beyond the optical core in G02B and G01N, C12Q (enzyme/DNA measurement) reaches 21.2% of records and A61B (diagnosis & surgery) 8.1% — light sheet claims are increasingly written for spatial biology and diagnostic use cases, not standalone instrumentation.
Filing partnerships cluster around a few research hubs
Ten co-assignee pairs recur in the data, with the strongest pairing appearing in 24 shared records — evidence that some university-industry or university-institute pairs file jointly and repeatedly rather than through one-off collaborations.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to light sheet and volumetric imaging, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where they are moving
The ranked leaders sit alongside a long tail: 100 assignees are ranked in total, and most hold only a small number of families. Recent-year momentum figures should be read cautiously given publication lag — a drop to a single latest-year filing is often an artefact of records still being published, not a real pullback.
A single institution holds the largest share
The leading assignee holds 137 records, well ahead of fifth place at 63 and tenth place at 37 — a steep drop-off that marks a genuine leadership position rather than a crowded tie at the top.
Established microscopy vendors anchor the hardware side
Commercial microscope manufacturers appear consistently in the ranked leaders, filing around sheet-forming optics, dual-view fusion and sample mounting — the mechanical and optical foundation the rest of the field builds on.
Spatial genomics companies file on top of the optical base
Genomics-focused entrants have added claims layered on existing imaging platforms rather than reinventing the optical path, concentrating instead on sample chemistry, clearing protocols and data throughput.
Most ranked filers hold only a handful of families
Outside the leading ten, holdings fall off quickly. This is the group worth watching for licensing or acquisition activity, since single-digit filers with a strong niche claim are common targets in a concentrated field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| California Institute of Technology | 1 | -83% |
| The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | 1 | -75% |
| 10x Genomics, Inc. | 1 | -96% |
| The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York | 1 | -50% |
| Leica Microsystems CMS GmbH | 1 | 0% |
| Singular Genomics Systems, Inc. | 1 | -86% |
| Carl Zeiss Microscopy GmbH | 0 | -100% |
| Light Field Lab, Inc. | 0 | — |
Turning this landscape into a working plan
A concentration snapshot is a starting point, not a conclusion. The next steps depend on whether you are clearing a design, scouting a licence, or deciding where to file next.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the leading holders
With 47.0% of records held by ten assignees, any new instrument or protocol should be checked against their specific claim scope before development proceeds, not just against the field in aggregate.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaMap the white space chips against your own roadmap
Under-claimed branches such as adaptive sheet-thickness control or high-throughput data pipelines may offer room to file without immediately colliding with the top holders.
Search white space in EurekaTrack momentum, not just headline counts
Recent-year drops for individual assignees are partly a publication-lag artefact; revisit the trend once 2025-2026 filings finish publishing before concluding any single filer has slowed.
Set up trend tracking in EurekaCommon questions on light sheet and volumetric imaging patents
The assignee ranking is led by a single institution with 137 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 63 and the tenth-place holder at 37. That leader-to-tenth spread shows a genuinely top-heavy field rather than several tied contenders. The five leading assignees together hold 31.8% of the 1,501 records in scope, and the ten leading assignees hold 47.0%, so roughly half the field's activity sits with a small group of research universities and instrument makers.
Filings grew from 112 in 2017 to a peak of 130 in 2022, then eased to 107 by 2024 — a 16% decline across that three-year window. That is a cooling from the peak, not a collapse, and the most recent published years (2025-2026) will look artificially low because patent publication typically lags filing by about 18 months. Any conclusion about current-year activity should wait for those records to finish publishing.
Optical elements and systems (G02B) and material analysis and testing (G01N) each appear in close to half of the 1,501 records in scope, forming the core of the field. Enzyme and DNA measurement (C12Q) reaches 21.2% of records, and image data processing (G06T) reaches 11.0%, showing that a meaningful share of recent filings pair the optical hardware with genomic assay or computational reconstruction rather than treating imaging as a standalone instrument category.
Relative to the dense claim coverage in core optics and material analysis, branches such as dual-view fusion algorithms, adaptive sheet-thickness control, clearing protocol chemistry and high-throughput data pipelines carry comparatively thinner filing density. That does not guarantee an easy grant, but it does mean fewer entrenched claim holders to design around. A prior-art search focused specifically on those sub-areas, rather than the field broadly, is the more efficient starting point.
Citation counts accumulate over time within the searched corpus, so records published earlier — such as those from the mid-2010s — have simply had more years and more subsequent filings in which to be cited. This makes citation count a reasonable proxy for influence on the field's early direction, but a poor proxy for which patents matter most to current product development. Recent, highly relevant filings may show low citation counts purely because they are new.
With the top five assignees holding 31.8% of the 1,501 records in scope and the top ten holding 47.0%, ownership is meaningfully concentrated: nearly half the field's filings sit with just ten organisations out of 100 ranked assignees. Outside that group, holdings drop off quickly into a long tail of single- or low-digit filers, which is typical for a field anchored by a handful of research institutions and instrument makers.
Research Light Sheet and Volumetric Imaging in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole light sheet and volumetric imaging 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.