MEMS Oscillator Phase Noise Patents: Who Leads, Where Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five most active filers account for 71.0% of all 31 records in scope, with the leader alone holding 6.
- A complete ranking, not a sample. All 31 records in scope resolve to just 12 ranked assignees, and the top 10 combined cover every one of them.
- Oscillation and frequency control dominate the claims. H03B and H03L together touch the majority of records, while MEMS-specific classes B81B and B81C stay in single digits.
Filing growth compares 2021 (2 records) with 2024 (3) — 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 31 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
MEMS oscillator phase noise sits at the intersection of resonator design and the sustaining electronics that keep it stable. This landscape pulls records where the claims or description address phase noise floor, jitter, resonator quality factor, sustaining amplifier design, nonlinearity, or close-in noise in a MEMS oscillator or MEMS resonator oscillator context — the electrical and mechanical levers engineers pull to hit a timing spec, not MEMS fabrication broadly.
The scope spans 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, with 31 published records forming the corpus analysed here. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years understate actual filing activity and should be read as still filling in.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 31 records: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend
Filings ran from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 4 in 2020, then eased before recovering: 2021 to 2024 rose from 2 to 3, a +50% move over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a slowdown.
IPC composition
H03B (oscillation generation) appears in 54.8% of the 31 records, H03L (automatic frequency/phase control) in 41.9%, and H03H (impedance networks and filters) in 35.5%. MEMS-specific classes B81B and B81C register at 12.9% and 3.2% respectively — a sign that most of the claim activity in this corpus is on the electrical side of the oscillator, not the mechanical resonator structure itself.
Shares are the percentage of the 31 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on MEMS Oscillator Phase Noise with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about mems oscillator phase noise and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this corpus
Oven controlled MEMS oscillator and system and method for calibrating the same
A calibration system for an oven controlled MEMS oscillator selects predetermined target set-point values, controls a heater inside the oven to adjust the set-point, and measures the resulting oscillation frequencies to determine a target set-point operation value for the oven.Filed by Murata Manufacturing, published 2019-04-04 as US20190103874A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20120043999A1 | MEMS stabilized oscillator | 39 |
| 2 | US20090212877A1 | MEMS oscillator | 22 |
| 3 | JP2009200888A | MEMS oscillator | 19 |
| 4 | US9065459B1 | Clock generation circuits using jitter attenuation control circuits with dynamic range shifting | 14 |
| 5 | US20180019754A1 | Oven controlled MEMS oscillator | 12 |
| 6 | US10107919B1 | Satellite positioning system receivers with microelectromechanical systems oscillators | 9 |
| 7 | US20140176248A1 | Use of electronic attenuator for MEMS oscillator overdrive protection | 8 |
| 8 | US20130321051A1 | Digital locked loop for producing a clock having a selected frequency ratio relative to a clock produced by a… | 7 |
| 9 | US7924109B2 | MEMS oscillator | 6 |
| 10 | US11811380B2 | Micro-resonator design implementing internal resonance for MEMS applications | 4 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; treat them as a signal of prior-art weight, 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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Read together, the concentration figures and the IPC split point to a field where the top of the ranking is settled and the claim space is unevenly occupied.
The leaderboard is short and stable
Five assignees account for 71.0% of all 31 records in scope, and the leader alone holds 6. With only 12 ranked assignees total and the top 10 covering 100.0% of records, this is a field with no long tail of hundreds of small filers — new entrants are competing directly against a small, identifiable set of incumbents.
Activity picked back up after 2020
Filings rose from 2 in 2021 to 3 in 2024, a +50% increase over that span, after peaking at 4 in 2020. 2025 and 2026 numbers are still incomplete because of publication lag and should not be read as a decline.
Sustaining-circuit claims outweigh resonator-structure claims
H03B and H03L together cover the majority of the 31 records, while B81B (MEMS microstructures) sits at just 12.9% and B81C (MEMS manufacturing) at 3.2%. Most of the claimed innovation in this corpus is in oscillation generation and frequency/phase control circuitry, not in the resonator's mechanical fabrication.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to mems oscillator phase noise, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space
The ranking returned by the data endpoint is the complete list for this corpus — 12 assignees, not a top-50 or top-100 cut. Recent-year momentum across the leaders sits at zero for the latest year, consistent with publication lag rather than a real pullback.
A single assignee holds the most filings
The top-ranked assignee accounts for 6 of the 31 records in scope, the largest single share in a field of 12 ranked companies. That lead is built on oscillator and calibration circuitry claims rather than resonator fabrication.
A tight cluster behind the leader
Fifth place in the ranking holds 3 records, and the gap to the leader's 6 is not large — several assignees are filing at a similar, moderate pace rather than one company running away with the field.
Single-filing entrants fill out the ranking
Tenth place holds just 1 record, and the top 10 assignees together account for 100.0% of all 31 records — meaning every record in this corpus belongs to one of these 12 ranked entities, with no unranked filers left over.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Ohio State Innovation Foundation | 0 | — |
| Silicon Laboratories Inc. | 0 | — |
| ABLIC Inc. | 0 | — |
| Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| QUEVY EMMANUEL P | 0 | — |
| L3HARRIS INTERSTATE ELECTRONICS CORP | 0 | — |
| Texas Instruments Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to where claim density is high and where it is thin. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision needs a closer read of the specific claims involved.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 6 of 31 records, any new sustaining-amplifier or calibration circuit design should be checked against that portfolio before drafting claims.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaScope claims toward the under-claimed branches
B81B and B81C together cover under 15% of records combined, well behind the electrical-side classes — a resonator-structure or fabrication-focused claim may face less prior art.
Run a white space search in EurekaTrack the 2021–2024 filing recovery
The +50% move from 2021 to 2024 suggests renewed activity after the 2020 peak; monitoring new publications as 2025–2026 data completes will show whether that pace holds.
Set up a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions on MEMS oscillator phase noise patents
The corpus resolves to 12 ranked assignees covering all 31 records in scope, with a single leader holding 6 records. The top 5 assignees combined account for 71.0% of all records, and the top 10 cover 100.0% — so this is a field with a short, identifiable leaderboard rather than hundreds of scattered filers. Anyone entering this space should expect to compete directly against a small set of known incumbents rather than a fragmented long tail.
Filings rose from 2 in 2021 to 3 in 2024, a +50% increase over that three-year span, following an earlier peak of 4 in 2020. Figures for 2025 and 2026 appear lower, but that reflects publication lag of roughly 18 months rather than a genuine drop in filing activity. Based on the complete years available, the trend through 2024 is one of recovery and growth, not decline.
The dominant classes are H03B (oscillation generation), present in 54.8% of the 31 records, H03L (automatic frequency and phase control) at 41.9%, and H03H (impedance networks and filters) at 35.5%. MEMS-specific classes B81B and B81C, covering the microstructure and its manufacture, appear far less often, at 12.9% and 3.2% respectively. This split shows most claimed innovation addresses the electronics around the resonator rather than the resonator's mechanical structure itself.
The lightest-claimed IPC areas in this corpus are B81C (MEMS manufacturing, 3.2% of records) and G04C (electromechanical clocks, 3.2%), alongside a modest overlap with G01S (radar and positioning, 9.7%). These low counts point to under-claimed branches around resonator fabrication methods and clock-referenced or positioning-integrated MEMS timing circuits, where less prior art may stand in the way of new filings. A low count is not proof the technology is unimportant, only that it is thinly claimed relative to the sustaining-circuit classes.
US20190103874A1, filed by Murata Manufacturing and published 2019-04-04, covers a calibration system for an oven controlled MEMS oscillator that selects target set-point values, drives a heater to reach them, and measures the resulting oscillation frequency to determine an optimal set-point. It is specific to oven-controlled calibration using measured-frequency feedback, so designs that calibrate via other mechanisms, such as non-oven temperature compensation or open-loop set-point selection, sit outside its literal claim scope. Any new oven-controlled MEMS oscillator with closed-loop frequency-based calibration should have counsel review this filing directly rather than relying on this summary.
Research MEMS Oscillator Phase Noise in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole mems oscillator phase noise 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.