MEMS Pressure Sensor QC Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Filings have flattened, not grown. activity peaked in 2019 at 7 filings and had fallen to a single filing by 2022, with no sign of a rebound through the most recent full year.
- The claim space is narrow and old. the most-cited records date back to implantable and capacitive RF sensor designs, and the dataset's top assignees show zero filings in the latest year — the core calibration approaches were staked out early.
- Filing is split three ways geographically. the United States and Europe each carry roughly a third of receiving-office activity, with China, WIPO and India trailing well behind, so regional strategy still matters for anyone entering now.
Filing growth compares 2021 (2 records) with 2024 (2) — 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 62 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families at the intersection of MEMS pressure sensing and the quality-control step that makes a raw die usable: wafer-level test, calibration, trimming and offset compensation. The search combines title/abstract language for MEMS and micromachined pressure sensors with claim/description language for the calibration step, and restricts to force-and-pressure and MEMS-manufacturing IPC classes. 62 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 make up the corpus.
Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one or two years in any trend chart will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be. That lag does not change the picture here, though: the peak was already several years ago, and the decline shows up well before the most recent, still-incomplete year.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 62-family corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filings rose to a 2019 peak, then fell
From 4 filings in 2017, activity climbed to a peak of 7 in 2019, then dropped sharply — by 2022 the corpus shows just 1 filing, and the latest year records none. This is a mature, contracting filing pattern rather than an emerging one.
Claims concentrate in force/pressure measurement
All 62 records touch G01L (force and pressure measurement), with meaningful secondary activity in B81C and B81B (MEMS manufacturing and microstructures) and a smaller footprint in general semiconductor-device classes (H10N, H01L, H10D). Battery and power-grid classes (H01M, H02J) appear only marginally, suggesting most calibration work is still framed as a sensor problem rather than a power-management one.
Shares are the percentage of the 62 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on MEMS Pressure Sensor Quality Control with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about mems pressure sensor quality control and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records anchor the field
Wireless MEMS pressure sensor with built-in calibration (US7918138B2)
A wireless microelectromechanical system (MEMS) pressure sensor with built-in calibration. An actuator is coupled with a pressure sensing device to enable the pressure to be calibrated against the known pressure exerted by the actuator. The sensing component is configured to flex under the application of force to a pure bending condition, i.e., the sensing component flexes with no or insignificant shear forces in the sensing component.Filed by The Regents of the University of California; issued 2011.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7252006B2 | Implantable mechanical pressure sensor and method of manufacturing the same | 110 |
| 2 | US6945115B1 | Micromachined capacitive RF pressure sensor | 105 |
| 3 | US20130118265A1 | MEMS capacitive pressure sensor, operating method and manufacturing method | 59 |
| 4 | US20160091378A1 | Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) pressure sensor having a leakage path to a cavity | 57 |
| 5 | US20180313709A1 | MEMS pressure sensor with through-hole cap | 49 |
| 6 | US6782755B2 | Surface-micromachined pressure sensor and high pressure application | 42 |
| 7 | US20020053242A1 | Surface-micromachined pressure sensor and high pressure application | 33 |
| 8 | US10006824B2 | Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) pressure sensor having a leakage path to a cavity | 25 |
| 9 | US9383282B2 | MEMS capacitive pressure sensor, operating method and manufacturing method | 25 |
| 10 | US20180172532A1 | Micromachined pressure sensor and method of making the same | 20 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; treat them as a map of foundational claims, not of current commercial activity.
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 about where this field stands
Three signals from the dataset matter more than the raw count of 62 families: the shape of the filing curve, the age of the most influential claims, and how thin the collaboration layer is.
A contracting filing curve, not a growing one
Filings peaked at 7 in 2019 and had fallen to a single filing by the 2022 midpoint, with the latest year showing none recorded so far. Even allowing for publication lag, this is a field where the core calibration approaches were largely staked out several years ago rather than one still attracting fresh filers.
The most-influential claims are the oldest
The two highest-cited records — an implantable mechanical pressure sensor and a capacitive RF pressure sensor — sit well above the rest of the corpus on citation count. New entrants are building on foundations laid down early, and citation counts here favour those older records by construction.
Co-filing is rare and concentrated around one institution
Only 7 co-assignee pairs appear across the whole corpus, and the strongest of them centres on a single academic assignee paired with an oilfield-services company and two individual inventors. Most filers in this space are working alone rather than in joint ventures or research consortia.
Filing strategy is still US- and Europe-led
The United States and the European Patent Office between them account for the large majority of receiving-office activity, with China, WIPO and India well behind. A filer targeting only one of those two blocs is missing a comparable share of the documented prior art.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to mems pressure sensor quality control, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it's still open
Filing has concentrated among a small set of established sensor and semiconductor names, but the current-year momentum figures tell the more useful story: even the most active historical filers show no filings in the latest year, which is consistent with a claim space that is occupied but not being actively contested.
A long tail behind a handful of repeat filers
The ranking spans established MEMS and semiconductor names alongside universities and individual inventors, with no single assignee dominating the corpus outright. That spread, combined with the flat recent-year trend, points to a field where positions were established rather than one still being actively fought over.
Historical leaders have gone quiet
Every one of the most prominent assignees by historical count — spanning semiconductor, MEMS and instrumentation companies — recorded zero filings in the latest year tracked. That is a strong signal the calibration-and-trim claim space is settled rather than in active dispute.
Academic-industry pairing is the exception, not the rule
The strongest co-assignee relationship in the corpus links one academic institution to an oilfield-services company, appearing twice; every other pairing appears once. Joint filing is not how this field typically moves.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| NXP Semiconductors N.V. | 0 | — |
| California Institute of Technology (Caltech) | 0 | — |
| AMS International AG | 0 | — |
| VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd | 0 | — |
| Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. | 0 | — |
| InvenSense, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Honeywell International Inc. | 0 | — |
| Infineon Technologies AG | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a settled but unevenly enforced claim space. Two directions make sense from here.
Map freedom-to-operate against the oldest high-citation patents
Before designing a new trim or offset-compensation approach, check it against the implantable and capacitive RF pressure sensor patents that anchor this corpus's citation graph — they are the claims most likely to have been licensed or litigated already.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in Eureka →Watch for a re-acceleration tied to new sensor form factors
The battery- and power-grid-adjacent IPC classes are thin today but could pick up as pressure sensors move into new integrated power systems. A quarterly re-run of this search would catch that shift early.
Set up monitoring in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The corpus's leading assignees by historical filing count include established semiconductor and sensor companies alongside at least one university, but no single company holds a dominant share of the 62 families tracked. Notably, every one of the leading historical assignees shows zero filings in the most recent year, which suggests the field has moved past its most active filing period. Anyone evaluating this space should look at the full assignee ranking rather than assuming one or two names control it.
Filing activity peaked in 2019 at 7 filings and declined steadily afterward, with the corpus showing just 1 filing by 2022 and none recorded in the latest year. Publication lag of roughly 18 months means the very latest year is always undercounted, but the decline is visible well before that recent window, so this reads as a contracting rather than emerging filing pattern. New entrants should expect to be filing into a mature, well-cited claim space rather than a greenfield one.
US7918138B2 describes a wireless MEMS pressure sensor with a built-in actuator that calibrates the sensor against a known applied pressure, with the sensing element designed to flex under pure bending with minimal shear force. It matters because built-in, actuator-based calibration is a foundational approach for self-calibrating wireless pressure sensors, and later filings in this space have had to work around or build on that mechanism. Anyone designing a wireless or implantable calibration scheme should review this patent's claims specifically before finalising an actuator-based approach.
The IPC composition shows the large majority of claims sitting in core force-and-pressure measurement and MEMS manufacturing classes, while adjacent areas — battery-integrated offset compensation and power-grid-linked self-calibration — carry only a marginal footprint. That thinness does not guarantee the space is legally open, but it does mean fewer prior filings to design around if a new sensor integrates calibration with power-management circuitry. A proper freedom-to-operate search in those adjacent classes is still the responsible next step before filing.
The United States and the European Patent Office each account for a substantial share of receiving-office filings in this corpus, together well ahead of China, the WIPO PCT route and India. That split reflects where the historical leading assignees are based and where they have chosen to seek protection first. A filer planning global coverage should treat US and European filings as the baseline comparison set, then check China and PCT filings separately given their smaller but still relevant presence.
Research MEMS Pressure Sensor Quality Control in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole mems pressure sensor quality control 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.