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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (25 records) with 2024 (12) — 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 284 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
This landscape tracks patent activity naming capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducers (CMUT) and piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducers (PMUT) in the title, cross-referenced against claim and description language covering membrane collapse mode, bias voltage control, fabrication yield, receive sensitivity, electronics integration and array uniformity. These are the practical levers that separate a working device from a lab demonstration, so the search string is built to surface records that address manufacturing and performance, not just device concepts.
The scope spans filings from 2015 through the middle of 2026, with 284 records in total. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years understate real filing activity — treat 2024 as the last complete year for trend reading.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 284-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filings rose from 17 in 2017 to a peak of 25 in 2021, then declined to 12 by 2024 — a -52% move over that three-year span. Readings for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a continued decline.
B06B (generating mechanical vibrations) appears on 59.9% of the 284 records, followed by A61B (diagnosis and surgery) at 26.4%. Solid-state and semiconductor classes (H10N, H01L) each sit near a quarter of records, reflecting how much of the field is fabrication-driven rather than purely acoustic. Because records carry multiple IPC codes, these shares add up to well over 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 284 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about micromachined ultrasonic transducers and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaDisclosed is a measurement method of ultrasonic waves using a capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer. The method includes measuring an ultrasonic wave by applying a bias voltage to the capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer in each of a plurality of first periods, and applying a voltage that is equal to or greater than 0V and smaller than the bias voltage to the capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer in a second period between two first periods among the plurality of first periods.Filed by Hitachi, published 2021-03-04 as US20210063553A1.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20050200241A1 | Multiple element electrode cMUT devices and fabrication methods | 200 |
| 2 | US20090122651A1 | Direct wafer bonded 2-D CUMT array | 159 |
| 3 | US20080048211A1 | Trench isolated capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer arrays with a supporting frame | 146 |
| 4 | US7449821B2 | Piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducer with air-backed cavities | 124 |
| 5 | US7846102B2 | Direct wafer bonded 2-D CUMT array | 121 |
| 6 | US20050203397A1 | Asymetric membrane cMUT devices and fabrication methods | 121 |
| 7 | US20170021391A1 | Micromachined ultrasonic transducers with a slotted membrane structure | 106 |
| 8 | US7612483B2 | Harmonic cMUT devices and fabrication methods | 105 |
| 9 | US20060238067A1 | Piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducer with air-backed cavities | 104 |
| 10 | US20070161896A1 | Capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer (cMUT) and its production method | 95 |
Ranked by citation count within this corpus; older filings accumulate citations simply by being available longer, so treat this as a signal of influence rather than current relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →The ranking and the IPC mix point in the same direction: a handful of filers built early positions around fabrication and bias-voltage control, while the acoustic and imaging-integration layers remain more open.
Five assignees account for 124 of the 284 records in scope. That leaves 56 other ranked companies splitting the remainder, several with only one or two filings — a classic long-tail structure rather than a two-player race.
Filings peaked at 25 in 2021 and fell to 12 by 2024. Several of the most active historical filers show no filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with a maturing first wave of fabrication patents rather than a shrinking field overall.
B06B and A61B carry the bulk of filing activity, but B81B — the microstructural/MEMS device class most directly tied to wafer-level fabrication — covers just 32 of 284 records. That is a comparatively open lane for process and yield claims.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to micromachined ultrasonic transducers, with the prior art for and against each one.
The ranking covers 57 companies across academic, medical-imaging and semiconductor backgrounds. Ranking position moves quickly outside the leading group, since single-digit filing counts separate mid-table entrants.
The top-ranked assignee holds 33 records, well ahead of the fifth-place filer at 16 — a gap that marks a genuine leadership position rather than a marginal one.
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset. The strongest pairing links a research institute with an individual inventor, and academic-industry pairs among the recurring names suggest sponsored or licensed research rather than broad joint ventures.
A number of the most active assignees by cumulative count show zero filings in the most recent tracked year. Given publication lag, this is as likely to reflect filings still working through the pipeline as an actual pullback.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | 0 | -100% |
| Georgia Tech Research Corporation | 0 | — |
| Koninklijke Philips N.V. | 0 | — |
| Olympus Medical Systems Corp. | 0 | — |
| Kolo Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
| University of Windsor | 0 | — |
| Orchard Ultrasound Innovation LLC | 0 | — |
| Olympus Corporation | 0 | — |
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or identifying a filing gap.
With 43.7% of records held by five assignees, any new fabrication or bias-control filing should be checked against their claim scope before drafting.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaSeveral top-cumulative filers show zero activity in the latest tracked year. Watching whether that continues past the publication-lag window will show whether the field is consolidating or just pausing.
Set up monitoring in EurekaB81B and array-uniformity claims sit at lower density than the acoustic classes, which is where a narrower, defensible filing is more likely.
Explore white space in EurekaCMUT (capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer) patents typically claim electrostatic membrane actuation, bias-voltage schemes and collapse-mode operation, while PMUT (piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducer) patents claim piezoelectric thin-film actuation on a MEMS membrane. Both are captured in this 284-record dataset because the search targets either term appearing in the title alongside fabrication and performance language. In practice, the IPC mix shows heavy overlap in B06B and H10N classes, meaning many filings claim structural or fabrication features common to both approaches rather than being purely CMUT- or PMUT-specific.
The ranking covers 57 companies, with the leading assignee holding 33 records against 16 for the fifth-place filer — a meaningful gap that marks genuine leadership. The top five combined account for 43.7% of all 284 records, and the top ten reach 66.5%, so activity is concentrated but far from a duopoly. Beyond the leading group, filing counts drop quickly into single digits across a long tail of academic and corporate entrants.
Filings peaked at 25 in 2021 and fell to 12 by 2024, a -52% change over that span, which reads as a genuine pullback from an earlier filing wave. However, publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so figures for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete and should not be read as confirmation of further decline. The safest read is that the first wave of core fabrication patents matured around 2021 and later activity has shifted toward narrower, more specific claims.
The IPC composition shows B06B and A61B carrying the bulk of filing density, at 59.9% and 26.4% of the 284 records respectively, while B81B (MEMS structural devices) covers only 11.3%. That gap suggests process-level and wafer-yield claims tied specifically to MEMS fabrication are less crowded than acoustic or imaging-integration claims. Array-uniformity and electronics-on-membrane integration are two specific sub-areas worth checking for open claim space before assuming freedom to operate.
US20210063553A1, filed by Hitachi and published in March 2021, claims a measurement method that applies a bias voltage to a capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer during defined periods, with an intermediate voltage step between bias periods. This is a method claim around the drive-and-measurement sequence, not a device or fabrication claim, so it is most relevant to anyone designing bias-voltage control circuitry or drive electronics for a CMUT array. Teams working on alternative bias-sequencing schemes or on PMUT devices, which do not rely on the same electrostatic bias mechanism, are less likely to be affected directly.
Go past this page: query the whole micromachined ultrasonic transducers 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.