Photonic Integrated Circuit Patents: Who Leads, Filing Trends 2026
- Filing activity has already peaked. 2021 recorded the most filings in this dataset, and by the midpoint year of 2022 volume had already dropped back — the growth curve is flat to declining, not accelerating.
- Optical elements dominate the claim space. Every record in this set touches G02B, and the next largest subclasses — material analysis, lasers, and a residual category — sit at a fraction of that volume, showing how narrow the active claim territory actually is.
- Co-filing between assignees is almost nonexistent. Only two co-assignee pairs appear across the whole dataset, meaning most organizations here are filing solo rather than through joint development or foundry partnerships.
Filing growth compares 2021 (14 records) with 2024 (6) — 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 51 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families addressing wafer-scale fabrication, 300mm silicon photonics, high-volume manufacturing, and foundry processes for photonic integrated circuits, filtered against IPC classes covering optical elements, semiconductor devices, and lasers. It spans filings from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, capturing the period in which silicon photonics moved from lab demonstration toward pilot-line and foundry-scale production. The scope is deliberately narrow: it is not general PIC design, but the specific claims around getting PIC devices out of the lab and onto a production line.
Fifty-one families is a small, tightly bounded set. That size is itself informative — it suggests scale-up and mass-production claims for PICs remain a specialist niche relative to PIC design work generally, and that the organizations filing here are making a deliberate bet on manufacturing IP rather than device IP.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 51-family dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how the underlying technology classifications break down.
Filings rose to a 2021 peak, then eased
Filings grew from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 14 in 2021, then declined toward the 2022 midpoint figure of 9. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the final one or two years in this trend will always look thinner than they will eventually turn out to be — but the shape from 2017 to 2022 is already a rise-then-plateau pattern, not sustained growth.
Optical elements carry the claim weight
G02B (optical elements & systems) appears in all 51 records, making it the backbone classification for this dataset by definition of the search. Behind it, material analysis (G01N), lasers (H01S), and a residual H10W grouping each sit at 5 records, with modulation (G02F), semiconductor devices (H01L), and glass-related classes (C03B, C03C) trailing further — a sign that most activity concentrates on optical coupling and alignment structures rather than on modulation or materials science.
Shares are the percentage of the 51 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Photonic Integrated Circuit Scale-Up and Mass Production with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about photonic integrated circuit scale-up and mass production and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this space
Optical module including silicon photonics chip and coupler chip
An optical module includes a waveguide interconnect that transports light signals; a Silicon Photonics chip that modulates the light signals, detects the light signals, or both modulates and detects the light signals; a coupler chip attached to the Silicon Photonics chip and the waveguide interconnect so that the light signals are transported along a light path between the Silicon Photonics chip and the waveguide interconnect; and one of the Silicon Photonics chip and the coupler chip includes first, second, and third alignment protrusions. The other of the coupler chip and the Silicon Photonics chip includes a point contact, a linear contact, and a planar contact.Filed by SAMTEC, INC., published 2016-09-15 as US20160266322A1. Cited 65 times within this corpus, making it one of the two most-referenced records in the dataset.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20190086618A1 | High Density Opto-Electronic Interconnection Configuration Utilizing Passive Alignment | 72 |
| 2 | US20160266322A1 | Optical module including silicon photonics chip and coupler chip | 65 |
| 3 | US20220404546A1 | Wire-bonding methodologies utilizing preformed glass optical wires for making chip-to-chip optical interfaces | 30 |
| 4 | WO2021183792A1 | Optical fiber-to-chip interconnection | 27 |
| 5 | US10466433B2 | Optical module including silicon photonics chip and coupler chip | 21 |
| 6 | US9671557B1 | Vertical integration of hybrid waveguide with controlled interlayer thickness | 19 |
| 7 | US20180306991A1 | Optical module including silicon photonics chip and coupler chip | 14 |
| 8 | US10725254B2 | High density opto-electronic interconnection configuration utilizing passive alignment | 12 |
| 9 | US20240353614A1 | Optical communication substrate using glass interposer | 9 |
| 10 | WO2017131879A1 | Silicon-photonic tunable laser | 9 |
Citation counts reflect influence inside this searched corpus and skew toward older filings — treat them as a signal of what shaped the field, not of what matters most today.
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 say about this field
Three patterns stand out once filing trend, classification spread, and citation concentration are read together.
Activity peaked, then cooled
Filing volume rose from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 14 in 2021, then fell back to 9 by the 2022 midpoint. That is not a technology in early ramp — it reads more like a wave of interest that has already crested, ahead of the industry's actual mass-production ramp.
Optical elements own the claim space
Every record touches G02B, while the next classes — G01N, H01S, H10W — sit at only 5 records each. Claim activity is heavily weighted toward optical coupling, alignment, and packaging structures rather than laser sources or modulation.
Filers largely go it alone
Only two co-assignee pairs appear in the entire dataset, and neither involves a large-volume filer. Most organizations here are protecting manufacturing IP independently rather than through joint filings with foundry or equipment partners.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to photonic integrated circuit scale-up and mass production, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Nubis Communications, Inc. | GILES CLINTON RANDY | 2 |
| Yale University | RAKICH PETER | 1 |
With only two co-assignee pairs across 51 families, joint filings are rare enough that any new one would stand out as a deliberate signal of a foundry or equipment partnership forming.
Who is filing, and where the field is open
The assignee list is a long tail: several organizations appear with meaningful filing histories, but recent-year momentum has gone quiet across the board.
US Patent Office is the primary venue
26 filings route through the United States, with Europe (EPO) and WIPO/PCT each contributing 11 — meaning international filing via PCT is roughly as common as direct European filing, a sign that some applicants are still deciding where to pursue protection.
No assignee shows recent-year filings
Every assignee tracked for momentum — spanning university, corporate, and specialist filers — recorded zero filings in the latest year. Given the 18-month publication lag, some of this is an artifact of the data cut-off rather than a true stop in activity, but the flat trend line supports a genuine slowdown as well.
Interconnect and coupling patents lead on influence
The most-cited record addresses passive-alignment opto-electronic interconnection; the next several highest-cited records also concern chip-to-chip and fiber-to-chip coupling. Influence in this corpus concentrates on the physical interconnect problem, not on the photonic device itself.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Aeluna Corporation | 0 | — |
| Nubis Communications, Inc. | 0 | — |
| InnoLight Technology Corporation | 0 | — |
| University of Rochester | 0 | — |
| Samtec, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Lightmatter, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Yunhui Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with concentrated claim territory and cooling filing activity — useful starting points for deeper diligence.
Map freedom-to-operate around the top-cited interconnect patents
The highest-cited records all address chip-to-chip and fiber-to-chip coupling. Any new packaging or alignment approach should be checked against these claims specifically, not just against the field broadly.
Explore in EurekaWatch for renewed filing activity as production ramps catch up
Filing peaked in 2021 while the industry's actual mass-production ramp is arguably still ahead. A resumption of filings in the next data refresh would be a meaningful signal worth tracking.
Set up monitoring in EurekaTest claim language in the under-claimed branches
Wafer-level testing, glass interconnects, and yield calibration carry low record counts inside this scope. Drafting around these branches now, while prior art is thin, is cheaper than doing so later.
Draft with EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The dataset shows filings rising from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 14 in 2021, then falling to 9 by the 2022 midpoint. Part of this apparent decline is a publication-lag artifact, since patent filings typically take about 18 months to publish and the most recent years in any dataset are always undercounted. Even accounting for that lag, the shape from 2017 to the 2021 peak looks like a completed wave of early interest rather than an accelerating trend, which is consistent with organizations having already staked out core coupling and packaging claims before the industry's mass-production ramp fully arrived.
Influence in this corpus, measured by citation count, concentrates on records addressing chip-to-chip and fiber-to-chip optical interconnection, including passive-alignment configurations and coupler-chip assemblies. The single most-cited record in the dataset covers a high-density opto-electronic interconnection configuration using passive alignment, cited 72 times. Citation counts inside a searched corpus tend to favor older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate references, so treat this as a measure of historical influence rather than current market leadership.
Yes, in specific sub-areas. Classifications like glass manufacture and glass/enamel compositions (C03B, C03C) and modulation (G02F) carry only a handful of records each compared to the 51-record backbone in optical elements (G02B), suggesting claim territory there is far less crowded. That does not mean these areas are commercially unimportant — it means fewer parties have staked claims, so a well-drafted filing has more room to establish a defensible position without navigating dense prior art.
This landscape is deliberately scoped to manufacturing and scale-up claims — wafer-scale fabrication, 300mm silicon photonics processes, high-volume manufacturing methods, and foundry processes — rather than to photonic device or circuit design generally. That scope produces a much smaller set (51 families) than a general PIC search would return, and it explains why the technology composition skews so heavily toward optical coupling, alignment, and packaging structures rather than toward laser or modulator device physics.
Only two co-assignee pairs appear across the entire 51-family dataset, which is a low rate of joint filing even for a specialist niche. This suggests that most organizations in photonic integrated circuit manufacturing are treating their process and packaging know-how as proprietary IP to be filed solo, rather than pursuing joint development agreements with foundry or equipment partners that typically produce co-assigned patents. A new co-assignee pair appearing in future filings would be a useful early signal of a forming manufacturing partnership.
Research Photonic Integrated Circuit Scale-Up and Mass Production in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole photonic integrated circuit scale-up and mass production 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.