Micro & Nanomanufacturing Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 19.9% sits with five assignees. The top five combined hold 55 of 276 records in scope — the rest is a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants.
- Semiconductor devices dominate the class mix. H01L appears on 24.6% of the 276 records, well ahead of optics (G02B, 16.7%) and photolithography (G03F, 10.5%).
- Filing has kept growing, not just held steady. From 2021 to 2024 — the last complete filing year — records rose from 6 to 7, a 17% increase, even as 2018 remains the single busiest year on record.
Filing growth compares 2021 (6 records) with 2024 (7) — 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 276 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
The scope pulls records where manufacturing micro, production manufacturing micro or nanomanufacturing terms appear alongside process-control language — process temperature, tool geometry, material feed, dimensional tolerance, material phase or surface layer. That combination captures patents about controlling a manufacturing process at micro- or nano-scale, rather than the broader universe of anything touching semiconductors or MEMS.
276 records fall inside that scope between 2015 and the August 2026 cut-off. Filing activity peaked in 2018 and has continued at a lower but still active pace since, with the most recent years understated because publication typically lags filing by around eighteen months.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 276 records: how filing has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings ran from 10 in 2017 to a peak of 28 in 2018, then settled into a steadier band. The 2021-to-2024 span shows growth of 17% (6 to 7 records), the most recent stretch that can be read as complete; 2025 and 2026 are still filling in as publications catch up to filing dates.
IPC subclass distribution
H01L (semiconductor devices) leads at 24.6% of the 276 records, followed by G02B (optics, 16.7%), H10P (13.4%), G03F (photolithography, 10.5%), and B29C and B81C tied at 9.8% each covering plastics shaping and MEMS manufacturing respectively. Because records can carry multiple classes, these shares sum to more than 100%; they describe where claim density sits, not a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 276 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Micro- & Nanomanufacturing Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about micro- & nanomanufacturing patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in the corpus
GB1311684A — Method of manufacturing micro-circuit structures
Filed by Kogyo Gijutsuin in 1969 and published 1973, this record describes forming a substance layer on a semiconductor substrate, altering the surface composition to a controlled depth, opening a hole in the changed layer, dissolving the unchanged substance beneath it, and diffusing an impurity into the substrate using the surface layer as a self-aligned mask. The worked embodiment uses an aluminium layer oxidised and then selectively dissolved in NaOH.One of the earliest surface-layer diffusion-masking methods in the corpus, and a useful reference point for anything claiming controlled-depth diffusion via a sacrificial surface layer.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20030102079A1 | Method of joining components | 283 |
| 2 | US20090046362A1 | Roll to roll nanoimprint lithography | 237 |
| 3 | US6644786B1 | Method of manufacturing a thermally actuated liquid control device | 163 |
| 4 | US8027086B2 | Roll to roll nanoimprint lithography | 95 |
| 5 | US6245249B1 | Micro-structure and manufacturing method and apparatus | 92 |
| 6 | US20120323008A1 | Group 11 mono-metallic precursor compounds and use thereof in metal deposition | 85 |
| 7 | US20060278517A1 | Minute high-performance rare earth magnet for micromini product and process for producing the same | 78 |
| 8 | US6504903B1 | Laser-excited plasma light source, exposure apparatus and its making method, and device manufacturing method | 78 |
| 9 | US4146653A | Process of manufacturing dragees | 77 |
| 10 | US20150064628A1 | Methods for making micro- and nano-scale conductive grids for transparent electrodes and polarizers by roll t… | 57 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are a signal of prior art density, not 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 →What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-outs from the same dataset, each pointing at a different practical question: where the claim space is crowded, where growth is still real, and who is actually filing together.
The top of the field is compact
Five assignees hold 55 of the 276 records in scope, with the leader alone accounting for 16. Below that handful the ranking thins quickly into single- and few-filing entrants across the remaining 100 ranked companies, which is the whole ranking the dataset returns rather than a curated top tier.
Growth held through the last complete years
Records rose from 6 in 2021 to 7 in 2024, the last year that can be treated as complete given publication lag. 2018's peak of 28 was not sustained, but the field did not fall off after it — it settled into a steadier, still-growing pace.
Semiconductor claims crowd the top class
H01L carries the largest single share of the 276 records, with optics (G02B) and photolithography (G03F) next. MEMS-specific classes B81C and B81B sit lower at 9.8% and 6.5%, suggesting comparatively more open claim space in MEMS process control than in semiconductor device structure.
Co-filing is narrow and academic
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest ties are among individual named inventors rather than corporate partners — a pattern more typical of university or lab-originated filings than of industry joint ventures.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to micro- & nanomanufacturing patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gate sits
The ranking spans 100 companies counted by record; concentration is real at the very top but thins out fast, and much of the mid-field is single-institution or single-inventor activity.
A single leader, then a gap
The top-ranked assignee holds 16 records against a fifth-place figure of 8 and a tenth-place figure of 7 — the drop from first to fifth is steep, and the drop from fifth to tenth much shallower.
A wide, shallow tail below the leaders
Beyond the top ten, the ranking spreads across many organisations and named individual inventors with few records each, including university research groups and single-inventor filers.
US and EPO carry most of the volume
United States receiving-office filings lead at 113, ahead of the European Patent Office at 45 and WIPO/PCT at 33. Japan, Germany and Israel each carry smaller but present shares of the total.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Micronic Laser Systems AB | 0 | — |
| Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht Zentrum fur Material- und Kustenforschung GmbH | 0 | — |
| The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois | 0 | — |
| Fundacio Privada Ascamm | 0 | — |
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | 0 | — |
| STEMME GORAN | 0 | — |
| NIKLAUS FRANK | 0 | — |
| Jagotec AG | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures here describe the shape of the field. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going record by record.
Check claim scope against the most-cited records
The highest-cited patents in this corpus, including the roll-to-roll nanoimprint lithography families, set boundaries that newer filings in the same class need to design around.
Explore citation chains in EurekaMap the under-claimed sub-areas before drafting
MEMS process control and micro-scale material feed carry lower class density than semiconductor device structure — worth confirming with a fresh search before committing claim language.
Run a white-space search in EurekaTrack the leading assignees' recent activity
Several of the top-ranked assignees show no publications in the latest tracked year, which given publication lag may understate rather than reflect a real slowdown.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
This landscape identifies 276 published records between 2015 and the August 2026 data cut-off that combine micro- or nanomanufacturing terms with process-control language such as tool geometry, dimensional tolerance or material feed. That is a scoped count based on a specific search string, not a count of every patent ever filed that touches micro- or nanoscale manufacturing broadly. Filing peaked in 2018 at 28 records and has continued at a lower but active pace since, with the most recent years understated by publication lag.
The dataset ranks 100 assignees by record count, with the leader holding 16 records and the top five together accounting for 55 records, or 19.9% of the 276 in scope. Below the top ten the ranking spreads into a long tail of academic groups and named individual inventors filing one or a handful of records each. That pattern — a compact leading group followed by a shallow, wide tail — is typical of a field where lab and university research still drives a meaningful share of filing.
Semiconductor device claims under IPC class H01L appear on 24.6% of the 276 records, the largest single share, followed by optical elements and systems (G02B) at 16.7% and photolithography and photomechanics (G03F) at 10.5%. MEMS-specific classes B81C and B81B sit lower, at 9.8% and 6.5% respectively, which points to comparatively less crowded claim space in MEMS process control than in semiconductor structure or optics. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than the total record count.
Filing rose from 6 records in 2021 to 7 in 2024, a 17% increase over that span and the most recent period that can be read as complete given an approximate 18-month publication lag. The single busiest year on record remains 2018, with 28 filings, and activity since has settled to a steadier but still-active pace rather than a continuous decline. Any apparent drop in 2025 or 2026 figures should be read as incomplete publication data rather than a genuine slowdown.
Risk concentrates around the most-cited records, including the roll-to-roll nanoimprint lithography families and the early surface-layer diffusion-masking patent GB1311684A, since these sit at the root of citation chains that later filings build on. Risk also tracks class density: H01L, G02B and G03F carry the heaviest concentration of records, meaning claim space there is more likely to overlap with existing filings. Newer entrants working in MEMS process control or micro-scale material feed metering face comparatively less occupied claim space, based on the lower class shares recorded for B81C and B81B.
Research Micro- & Nanomanufacturing Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole micro- & nanomanufacturing patent landscape 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.