Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/optical-and-wireless-die-interconnect-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Chiplets & Advanced InterconnectOptical and Wireless Die Interconnect Patents: Who Leads and Where the Field Is Still Open
- Concentrated but not closed. the top 5 assignees hold 34.1% of all 768 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 45.4% — leaving more than half the field to a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants.
- Optical elements dominate the claim language. G02B appears in 47.4% of records, more than H01L semiconductor-device claims (29.3%) and well ahead of H04B transmission claims (19.0%).
- Filing activity grew steadily through the last complete year. annual filings rose from 47 in 2021 to 64 in 2024, a +36% increase, before the expected 18-month publication lag thins out 2025-2026 counts.
768
Published Records
34%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+36%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (47 records) with 2024 (64) — 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 768 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 768 published records at the intersection of optical interconnect, wireless die interconnect and inductive coupling link claims, filtered to documents that also address a practical constraint — channel loss, alignment tolerance, power efficiency, channel data rate, coupling capacitance or integration complexity. That second filter matters: it separates general optical-communications filings from the subset actually engineering the tradeoffs that determine whether a die-to-die link works at package scale. Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, with publication lag meaning the most recent one to two years understate true filing volume.
The records span optical elements and systems, semiconductor device structures, general transmission, lasers, and printed-circuit assembly claims, reflecting how die interconnect work sits across optics, packaging and RF disciplines rather than inside a single IPC class.
Filing activity and technology mix, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 768 records: how filing volume moved year over year, and how the claim language splits across IPC subclasses.
Filings climbed into 2024 before the reporting lag sets in
Annual filings moved from 34 in 2017 to a peak of 64 in 2024, including a +36% rise from 47 in 2021 to that 2024 peak. The 2025 and 2026 figures (down to 3 in the partial latest year) reflect publication lag rather than an actual slowdown in filing.
Optical elements lead, but no single class dominates the field
G02B (optical elements & systems) appears in 47.4% of the 768 records, ahead of H01L semiconductor devices at 29.3% and H04B transmission at 19.0%. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum past 100% — the overlap itself shows how tightly optical, semiconductor and RF claims are intertwined in this space.
Shares are the percentage of the 768 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about optical and wireless die interconnect and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Representative and most-cited filings
Representative Filing
US10732366B2 — Optical interconnect device including a multi-fiber connector and an edge coupled connector
WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
An optical interconnect device may include a multi-fiber connector at a first end of the optical interconnect device. The optical interconnect device may include an edge coupled connector at a second end of the optical interconnect device. The optical interconnect device may include a plurality of optical fibers disposed inside the multi-fiber connector and the edge coupled connector to optically couple the multi-fiber connector to the edge coupled connector, wherein the multi-fiber connector and the edge coupled connector rigidly interconnect to structurally support the optical interconnect device.Filed as a structural connector claim — the rigid interconnection between the multi-fiber and edge-coupled ends is the mechanical detail worth checking against any new coupler design.
Most-cited records in the searched corpus
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US9432298B1 | System, method, and computer program product for improving memory systems | 1,426 |
| 2 | US6355501B1 | Three-dimensional chip stacking assembly | 823 |
| 3 | US6967347B2 | Terahertz interconnect system and applications | 285 |
| 4 | US20050176174A1 | Methodof making an integrated circuit | 269 |
| 5 | US5631988A | Parallel optical interconnect | 228 |
| 6 | US8213751B1 | Electronic-integration compatible photonic integrated circuit and method for fabricating electronic-integrati… | 220 |
| 7 | US5093879A | Electro-optical connectors | 220 |
| 8 | US6822326B2 | Wafer bonding hermetic encapsulation | 181 |
| 9 | US20060038168A1 | Terahertz interconnect system and applications | 176 |
| 10 | US20050285541A1 | Electron beam RF amplifier and emitter | 172 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not of current technical importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the data means for a filing decision
Three patterns worth acting on before drafting claims or scoping freedom-to-operate in this space.
Concentration
34.1% of 768
held by top 5 assignees
The top of the field is dense, the rest is open
With the top 5 assignees holding 34.1% of all 768 records and the top 10 holding 45.4%, more than half of the corpus sits with entities outside the ranked leaders. That is room for a new entrant to build a defensible position without immediately colliding with an incumbent's core claims.
Based on the 768-record assignee ranking
Technology mix
47.4% G02B
vs 9.2% H01S
Optical elements crowd the claim space; lasers less so
G02B optical-element claims cover nearly half the corpus while H01S laser and stimulated-emission claims sit at just 9.2%. A drafting strategy anchored in laser-source integration, rather than generic optical coupling, faces a thinner prior-art base.
IPC subclass shares, 768-record base
Momentum
+36%
filings, 2021 to 2024
Growth is real, but 2025-2026 counts are not yet the story
Filing volume rose 36% from 47 in 2021 to 64 in 2024, the last year that can be read as complete. The sharp drop shown for 2025 and 2026 reflects the roughly 18-month publication lag, not a cooling of activity.
Filing trend, 2021-2024
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to optical and wireless die interconnect, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-filing clusters
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | National University of Singapore | 16 |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | Nanyang Technological University | 16 |
| National University of Singapore | Nanyang Technological University | 16 |
| California Institute of Technology | Dartmouth College | 10 |
| Novalux Inc. | MOORADIAN ARAM | 5 |
| California Institute of Technology | HAJIMIRI SEYED ALI | 2 |
| California Institute of Technology | BUCKWALTER JAMES | 2 |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | Lasertron Inc. | 2 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data, with the strongest links running between a small cluster of university research groups, each pair sharing 16 co-filed records — a sign of sustained joint research programs rather than one-off collaborations.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where activity is shifting
The ranking spans 100 companies counted by record; a handful of large filers sit alongside a long tail of academic and single-filing entrants.
Leader
97 records
top-ranked assignee
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 97 records, more than three times the fifth-place total of 26. That gap suggests a sustained, multi-year filing program rather than opportunistic filing around a single product cycle.
Assignee ranking, 768 records
Mid-field
26 → 15
fifth to tenth place
The drop-off past the leader is gradual, not a cliff
Record counts fall from 26 at fifth place to 15 at tenth, a gentler slope than the gap between first and fifth. This is a field with several credible second-tier players rather than one dominant firm and a flat tail.
Assignee ranking, positions 5-10
Momentum
+100% YoY
one assignee, latest year
Recent-year activity is thin across the board
Most tracked assignees show flat or declining latest-year counts, consistent with publication lag rather than withdrawal from the space. Only one assignee in the momentum data posted a year-over-year increase, and off a small base.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Corporation | 2 | +100% |
| Nubis Communications | 0 | -100% |
| Monolithic 3D Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| California Institute of Technology | 0 | — |
| Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) | 0 | — |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 0 | — |
| Luxtera Inc. | 0 | — |
| Novalux Inc. | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, whitespace filing, or competitive tracking.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the top 10
With 45.4% of records held by the top 10 assignees, any new filing in optical or wireless die interconnect should be checked against that concentrated set before drafting claims.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaScope claims around under-claimed sub-areas
Laser-source integration and inductive coupling capacitance tuning show lighter density than the core optical-element classes, and may offer cleaner claim space.
Map whitespace in EurekaTrack the leader's recent filing behaviour
Momentum data shows most assignees flat or declining in the latest year, which is expected given publication lag — but tracking the leader's filings as 2025-2026 data fills in will clarify whether its lead is widening.
Set up tracking in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
One assignee leads the ranked field with 97 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 26 and the tenth-ranked at 15. The top 5 assignees together hold 34.1% of all 768 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 45.4%, meaning a large share of the field still sits outside the leading filers. This concentration pattern is typical of a technology area with a few sustained corporate research programs alongside many smaller or academic filers.
Filing volume grew from 47 records in 2021 to a peak of 64 in 2024, a 36% increase over that span, and 2024 is the most recent year that can be read as a complete filing year. The apparent drop in 2025 and 2026 is a publication-lag artefact — patents typically publish about 18 months after filing — not evidence of declining interest. Anyone assessing momentum should treat the last one to two years of any trend chart as understated rather than as a real slowdown.
Optical elements and systems (IPC class G02B) appear in 47.4% of the 768 records, making it the single most common classification, followed by semiconductor devices (H01L) at 29.3% and general transmission (H04B) at 19.0%. Because a single patent can carry multiple IPC codes, these percentages overlap rather than sum to 100%, which itself shows how closely optical, semiconductor and RF disciplines intersect in die interconnect claims. Laser-related claims (H01S) are comparatively thin at 9.2%, suggesting less crowded claim space there.
US10732366B2 claims an optical interconnect device with a multi-fiber connector at one end and an edge-coupled connector at the other, joined by optical fibers that are rigidly interconnected for structural support. The key claim element is the rigid mechanical coupling between the two connector types, not merely the optical path between them. Anyone designing a competing multi-fiber-to-edge-coupled connector should examine whether their mechanical joint avoids this rigid-interconnection structure or relies on a materially different coupling mechanism.
Relative to the dense optical-element and semiconductor-device claim base, sub-areas like laser-source integration for die-level links, inductive coupling capacitance tuning, and wireless die-to-die power efficiency show comparatively lighter claim density in this corpus. That does not guarantee an easy path to grant, but it indicates less prior art crowding than the core G02B and H01L classes. A practical next step is a targeted prior-art search within those specific sub-areas before committing to claim language.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Optical and Wireless Die Interconnect in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole optical and wireless die interconnect 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.