Book a demo

Optical Transceiver Waveguide Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026

Optical Transceiver Waveguide Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/optical-transceiver-optical-waveguide-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Photonics & Optics · Patent Landscape
Optical Transceiver Waveguide Patents: Who Holds the Ground

A patent landscape review of optical transceiver waveguide technology: filing trends, leading assignees, IPC composition, most-cited records and open claim space, based on 37 patent families filed 2015-2026.

37
Published Records
68%
Top-5 Share of All Records
EP
Leading Jurisdiction
17
Active Filers Ranked

Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 37 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.

Check your own idea
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

This dataset tracks patent families at the intersection of optical transceivers, optical modules and co-packaged optics with silicon photonics, integrated and low-loss waveguide claims, filtered to the core waveguide-optics IPC codes (G02B6/12, G02B6/122, G02B6/136). It captures 37 published families filed between 2015 and 2026, with the most recent year necessarily undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.

The picture is one of a technically narrow, IPC-concentrated field rather than a fast-growing one. Filing activity peaked in 2018 and has not recovered since, while the six receiving offices are spread fairly evenly rather than clustered around one jurisdiction — a pattern more consistent with a mature niche than an emerging battleground.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1LUMENTUM TECHNOLOGY UK LTD11
  2. 23M CO6
  3. 3LUXTERA LLC4
  4. 4II VI DELAWARE INC2
  5. 5INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION2
  6. 6OMRON CORP2
  7. 7ICU RES & INDAL COOPERATION GROUP2
  8. 8CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC2
  9. 9HUAWEI TECH CO LTD2
  10. 10STANDARD ELEKTRIK LORENZ AG1
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical Transceiver Optical Waveguide 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 data

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 37-family dataset: filings by year, and how those families distribute across IPC subclasses.

Filing trend, 2017-2026

Filings rose to a peak of 7 in 2018, fell back toward zero by the 2022 midpoint, and show no recovery through the partial 2026 count — a flat-to-declining curve rather than a growth one. Treat the final one to two years as undercounted given typical publication lag.

Filing trend, 2017-2026024680201772018201920202021202220232024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC subclass composition

Every family carries a G02B optical-elements classification; the next-heaviest overlaps are H04B transmission (17) and H01S lasers (14), with smaller pockets in G01J radiation measurement, H01L semiconductor devices and H04J multiplex communication. G02F modulation and B23P metalworking appear only marginally, marking them as thin, largely unclaimed adjacencies.

IPC subclass compositionG02B · Optical elements & systems37100.0%H04B · Transmission (general)1745.9%H01S · Lasers & stimulated emission1437.8%G01J · Radiation & light measurement1232.4%H01L · Semiconductor devices1129.7%H04J · Multiplex communication616.2%G02F · Optical control & modulation38.1%B23P · Metal working (general)12.7%

Shares are the percentage of the 37 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 Transceiver Optical Waveguide covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Optical Transceiver Optical Waveguide with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about optical transceiver optical waveguide and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key patents

The most-cited records in this space

Representative filing
US8231284B22012-07-31

US8231284B2 — Ultra-high bandwidth, multiple-channel full-duplex, single-chip CMOS optical transceiver

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION

A parallel optical module combining transmit and receive functions on a single-chip CMOS transceiver: sixteen 10-Gb/s channels for a 160-Gb/s bidirectional aggregate rate, with flip-chip VCSEL and photodiode arrays integrated onto the CMOS IC substrate and collimating lenses built into the backside of that substrate.Filed by International Business Machines Corporation; a foundational single-chip CMOS optical transceiver architecture that later, more-cited filings continue to reference.

US8231284B2 — patent drawing 1US8231284B2 — patent drawing 2
View full filing
Most-cited records
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US5732173AMicroreplicated optical module161
2US20120163811A1Ultra-high bandwidth, multiple-channel full-duplex, single-chip CMOS optical transceiver97
3US8231284B2Ultra-high bandwidth, multiple-channel full-duplex, single-chip CMOS optical transceiver43
4JP2019121691AIntegrated laser light source and optical transceiver using the same23
5US20090214158A1Optical Printed Circuit Board and An Optical Module Connected to the Optical Printed Circuit Board19
6US6498666B1Integrated optical transceiver18
7WO1999034485A1An integrated optical transceiver16
8US10684415B1Optical transceiver12
9US20200209704A1Method and system for an all-optical wafer acceptance test11
10EP1253447A2Optical integrated waveguide device, optical transceiver and other optical apparatuses using the optical devi…11

Citation counts are drawn from a searched corpus and skew toward older filings; read them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current commercial relevance.

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 Transceiver Optical Waveguide 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
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 →
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 numbers mean for a filing decision

Three read-throughs from the filing trend, IPC composition and citation pattern that matter for where to file next.

Filing momentum
Peak 2018 → flat by 2022
families per year

The growth window has already closed

A peak of 7 families in 2018 followed by a decline to zero at the 2022 midpoint indicates this claim space was staked out early and has not attracted a second wave of filers. New entrants are filing into settled prior art rather than an open field.

Based on 37 published families, 2015-2026
IPC concentration
37 of 37 in G02B
records

Every family competes on the same optical-elements ground

With G02B present in all 37 records and H04B and H01S the next-densest overlaps, the contested claim territory is specifically optical-element architecture combined with transmission and laser-source subject matter — not the broader photonics category.

IPC subclass distribution across 37 records
Citation influence
161 citations, oldest record
top-cited filing

Influence sits with early, foundational filings

The most-cited record predates the 2015-2026 filing window and the next two most-cited both describe single-chip CMOS transceiver architecture, suggesting the field's foundational architecture claims were set early and later filings build narrower improvements on top.

Citation counts favour older records in any searched corpus
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 transceiver optical waveguide, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical Transceiver Optical Waveguide 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 a settled but unevenly claimed field. Two directions are worth pursuing before committing a filing strategy.

Run a freedom-to-operate check on the under-claimed adjacencies

Electro-optic modulation and multiplex-channel waveguide combining show only marginal IPC coverage in this set. That thinness could mean open ground, or it could mean the relevant claims sit in adjacent search categories not captured here — worth confirming before filing.

Explore white space in Eureka

Map the foundational CMOS transceiver claims before drafting around them

The most-cited records in this set describe single-chip CMOS optical transceiver architecture predating the 2015 window. Any new filing on transceiver-waveguide integration should be checked against those claims specifically, not just the recent filing set.

Check claim scope in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical Transceiver Optical Waveguide 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

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Optical Transceiver Optical Waveguide 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 Transceiver Optical Waveguide in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole optical transceiver optical waveguide corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.