Occupant Detection Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 61.7% of all 1,045 records sit with just five assignees, so freedom-to-operate searches in this field start narrow whether you like it or not.
- Filings peaked in 2017 at 53 and fell to 8 by 2024 (down 74% from 2021's 31) — publication lag means 2025-2026 will still fill in, but the top of the curve has passed.
- B60R and B60N cover roughly half the field each (58.1% and 49.9% of records), while radar/positioning and lighting classes sit under 7%, marking where claim density thins out.
Filing growth compares 2021 (31 records) with 2024 (8) — 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 1,045 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Occupant detection and seat sensing spans the sensors, algorithms and mechanical layers used to determine who or what is sitting in a vehicle seat, chiefly to decide whether an airbag should deploy. The search set combines occupant classification and seat occupancy sensor language with the specific technical routes — capacitive sensing, weight mats, child-seat recognition, airbag suppression logic and the misclassification failure mode that regulators care about most.
The 1,045 records in scope run from 2015 through the current data cut-off, with the earliest core patents in this space dating from the early 2000s. Because a single filing can carry multiple IPC classes, the technology composition below is read as coverage across the field, not a partition of it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,045 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A sharp 2017 peak, then a multi-year decline
Filings ran at 53 in 2017, the peak of the series, then eased through the following years to 31 in 2021 and 8 in 2024 — a 74% drop over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so the true recent-year picture is understated in the raw counts.
B60R and B60N dominate; radar and lighting classes are thin
B60R (vehicles, parts and accessories) appears on 58.1% of records and B60N (vehicle seats and interior) on 49.9%, confirming that most filings anchor on the mechanical seat-and-vehicle-body context. Measurement and pulse-technique classes (G01V, G01R, H03K) sit in the 10-13% range, and radar/positioning (G01S) and lighting (B60Q) each cover under 7% of records — comparatively open ground relative to the two lead classes.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,045 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Occupant Detection and Seat Sensing with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about occupant detection and seat sensing and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaFoundational filings and the most-cited records
US20030040858A1 — Vehicle occupant classification system and method
A vehicle occupant classification system classifies a vehicle occupant based on data from an array of sensors using a combination of weight estimation, pattern recognition, and evaluation of statistical characteristics. This occupant classification can then be used to make an airbag deployment state decision. The major modules of this system can include a calibration unit, a weight estimation module, a pattern module, and a decision-making module. The calibration unit can perform a calibration process to normalize sensor deflections using a known deflection force in order to compensate for variations in sensors and the effects of the seat trim and foam.Filed by Wallace, Michael W., published 2003-02-27 — one of the earliest records combining weight estimation with pattern-recognition-based classification in this search set.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20050046584A1 | Asset system control arrangement and method | 1,779 |
| 2 | US20060208169A1 | Vehicular restraint system control system and method using multiple optical imagers | 935 |
| 3 | US20030209893A1 | Occupant sensing system | 652 |
| 4 | US7164117B2 | Vehicular restraint system control system and method using multiple optical imagers | 586 |
| 5 | US7663502B2 | Asset system control arrangement and method | 547 |
| 6 | US8725311B1 | Driver health and fatigue monitoring system and method | 501 |
| 7 | US20050131607A1 | Method and arrangement for obtaining information about vehicle occupants | 390 |
| 8 | US20140276090A1 | Driver health and fatigue monitoring system and method using optics | 368 |
| 9 | US20050023858A1 | Safety system for a closed compartment of a vehicle | 273 |
| 10 | US7596242B2 | Image processing for vehicular applications | 272 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure 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 or freedom-to-operate decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, trend and classification data are read together.
Five assignees hold the claim core
The top five assignees combined account for 645 of the 1,045 records in scope, or 61.7% of the field. That level of concentration means a new entrant's freedom-to-operate review has a short, known list of blocking portfolios to clear before it needs to look anywhere else.
The filing wave has passed its peak
Annual filings peaked at 53 in 2017 and had fallen to 8 by 2024, a 74% drop from the 31 filed in 2021. That decline says the core classification approaches are well-claimed already, not that the underlying need has gone away — regulatory pressure on misclassification keeps this space active even as raw filing counts thin out.
Mechanical seat context dominates; sensing-adjacent classes are thin
B60R and B60N together anchor most of the field's claim language in the vehicle-body and seat-interior context. Radar and positioning (G01S) and lighting (B60Q) each sit under 7% of records, suggesting sensing modalities beyond weight and capacitive detection are comparatively under-explored in this specific search set.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to occupant detection and seat sensing, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where filing has gone quiet
The ranking is dominated by a small group of long-standing suppliers and OEM-adjacent filers. Recent-year activity from several of the largest historical filers has dropped to zero, which is a filing-momentum signal rather than evidence a company has exited the space.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 356 of the 1,045 records, far ahead of fifth place at 49 and tenth place at 26 — a steep drop-off that marks this as a leader-plus-long-tail structure rather than an evenly split field.
Depth thins out fast past the top ten
The top ten assignees combined hold 77.7% of all records, meaning the remaining 90 ranked companies share the rest — useful context for scoping licensing conversations toward the names that actually matter.
Historical leaders have gone quiet recently
Several of the largest historical filers show zero filings in the latest tracked year. That pattern is consistent with a maturing core claim set rather than withdrawal, since acquisitions and portfolio consolidation in this sector have folded some legacy filers into larger safety-systems groups.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| IEE International Electronics & Engineering S.A. | 0 | — |
| Automotive Systems Laboratory, Inc. | 0 | — |
| TK Holdings Inc. | 0 | — |
| Elesys North America, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Delphi Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
| L&P Property Management Co. | 0 | — |
| LAMESCH LAURENT | 0 | — |
| Joyson Safety Systems Acquisition LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this from here
The dataset points to a field with a settled core and thinner edges. Two directions make sense depending on what you are trying to do.
Map freedom-to-operate against the top holders
With 61.7% of records held by five assignees, a targeted clearance search against that group covers most of the risk before wider searching is needed.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest claim language against the thinner classes
G01S and B60Q sit under 7% of records each, which is a reasonable place to check whether a new sensing-fusion or lighting-integrated approach is genuinely open.
Run a white-space check in EurekaCommon questions about occupant detection and seat sensing patents
The ranking of 100 companies is led by a single assignee holding 356 of the 1,045 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked company at 49 and the tenth at 26. The top five combined account for 61.7% of all records, so a small group of legacy automotive-safety suppliers controls most of the claim space. Any competitive review should start with that group before widening to the long tail of single- or few-filing entrants.
Annual filings peaked at 53 in 2017 and had declined to 8 by 2024, a 74% fall from the 31 filed in 2021. That is a genuine slowdown in raw filing volume, though 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months. The decline is more consistent with a well-claimed core than with a technology going out of use, since regulatory scrutiny of occupant misclassification remains a live driver.
B60R (vehicles, parts and accessories) and B60N (vehicle seats and interior) are the two dominant classes, covering 58.1% and 49.9% of the 1,045 records respectively. Measurement and circuit-logic classes such as G01V, G01R and H03K each appear on roughly 10-13% of records, reflecting the sensor and signal-processing side of these systems. Radar-based positioning (G01S) and lighting-integration (B60Q) are comparatively thin, each under 7%, which is where less-crowded claim language tends to sit.
US20030040858A1, filed by Wallace, Michael W. and published in 2003, describes a vehicle occupant classification system that combines weight estimation, pattern recognition and statistical evaluation to drive an airbag deployment decision. It sits among the earlier records in this search set to combine those three techniques into one classification pipeline. Because of its age and citation activity, it is a useful reference point for understanding how later capacitive-sensing and weight-mat claims built on or diverged from this multi-module approach, though its citation count reflects influence in the corpus rather than current commercial weight.
The thinnest tracked classes relative to the field's core are G01S (radar and positioning, 6.1% of records) and B60Q (vehicle lighting and signalling, 5.7%), compared with 58.1% for B60R and 49.9% for B60N. That gap suggests sensing modalities and signalling integrations adjacent to the dominant weight-mat and capacitive approaches carry lighter claim density. It is not proof the ground is unclaimed, only that it is comparatively less crowded than the mechanical seat-and-vehicle-body core, and any filing there should still be checked against the leading assignees' broader portfolios.
Research Occupant Detection and Seat Sensing in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole occupant detection and seat sensing 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.