Reactive Sputter Control Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
A data-backed look at reactive sputter control patents in physical vapor deposition: who leads filings, how concentrated the field is, and where filing activity is heading through 2026.
Filing growth = 2021 (7 records) → 2024 (3); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 576 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What reactive sputter control covers, and why the claim map looks the way it does
Reactive sputter control sits at the intersection of coating deposition and plasma process control: it covers the hardware and control loops that keep a reactive gas — typically oxygen or nitrogen — in balance with a metal target during sputtering, so the deposited film lands at the intended stoichiometry rather than drifting toward a fully poisoned or fully metallic target state. Almost every record in this dataset carries a C23C coating classification, which is expected given the search scope, but the more informative split is which records also touch H01J electron and discharge-tube classes versus which stay purely in coatings chemistry. That split roughly separates hardware-and-plasma-control claims from film-composition claims.
The assignee list is dominated by equipment makers and glass coaters rather than end-product manufacturers, which tracks with the underlying technology: control of the reactive gas ratio is a tooling problem before it is a materials problem, so the companies that patent it are the ones building the sputtering chambers and power supplies, not the ones buying coated glass or coated wafers downstream.
Filing concentration, technology mix and where applications get filed
Three views of the same 576-record set: who files, what they claim, and where they seek protection.
Filing trend: a 2018 peak followed by a real decline
Filings rose to a peak of 14 records in 2018, then fell; the 2021-to-2024 window alone shows a 57% drop, from 7 records to 3. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirmation of further decline — but the 2018-to-2024 pattern itself is not an artefact of that lag.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Technology composition: coating claims dominate, discharge-tube control is the second axis
C23C coating and surface deposition classifications appear in 97.9% of the 576 records, essentially defining the search scope. The next largest group, H01J electron and discharge tubes, appears in 41.8% of records and marks the plasma-hardware side of reactive sputter control. Smaller shares in H01L semiconductor devices (13.4%), C03C glass compositions (8.3%) and G02B optics (3.8%) show where the technology gets applied downstream.
Shares are the percentage of the 576 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Physical Vapor Deposition: Reactive Sputter Control Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about physical vapor deposition: reactive sputter control patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe patents setting the citation baseline
US6197165B1 — Method and apparatus for ionized physical vapor deposition
Ionized physical vapor deposition (IPVD) is provided by a method of apparatus for sputtering coating material from a compound sputtering source formed of an annular ring-shaped target with a circular target at its center, increasing deposition rate and coating uniformity. Each target is separately energized to facilitate control of the distribution of material sputtered into the chamber and the uniformity of the deposited film. The sputtered material from the targets is ionized in a processing space between the target and a substrate by generating a dense plasma in the space with energy coupled from a coil located outside of the vacuum chamber behind an annular dielectric window in the chamber.Filed by Tokyo Electron Limited; granted 2001-03-06.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6365010B1 | Sputtering apparatus and process for high rate coatings | 311 |
| 2 | US6488824B1 | Sputtering apparatus and process for high rate coatings | 298 |
| 3 | US4465575A | Method for forming photovoltaic cells employing multinary semiconductor films | 268 |
| 4 | US7628897B2 | Reactive ion etching for semiconductor device feature topography modification | 231 |
| 5 | US4793908A | Multiple ion source method and apparatus for fabricating multilayer optical films | 138 |
| 6 | US6197165B1 | Method and apparatus for ionized physical vapor deposition | 123 |
| 7 | US5429730A | Method of repairing defect of structure | 120 |
| 8 | US4976839A | Method of forming a barrier layer between a silicon substrate and an aluminum electrode of a semiconductor de… | 110 |
| 9 | US4842704A | Magnetron deposition of ceramic oxide-superconductor thin films | 110 |
| 10 | US6537428B1 | Stable high rate reactive sputtering | 101 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more years to accumulate citations — treat these as markers of influence on the field's vocabulary and claim structure, not as evidence that the underlying technology is still the current state of the art.
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 decision
Four readings of the same dataset, aimed at where to file, who to watch, and where the claim space is still open.
The top of the field is thin, not dominant
The five most active filers hold 19.6% of the 576 records in scope, and the ten most active hold 29.5%. That leaves roughly seventy per cent of the field to companies filing in smaller numbers — a structure closer to a long tail than a monopoly, so a new entrant is not filing into a space one company already owns.
Activity has genuinely cooled since the 2018 peak
Filings peaked at 14 records in 2018 and the 2021-to-2024 window shows a 57% decline. This is a completed-year comparison, not one skewed by publication lag, so it reflects a real pullback in new filing rather than reporting delay.
Plasma-hardware claims are the second axis, not a footnote
Where C23C coating classifications are close to universal in this scope, H01J discharge-tube classifications mark the subset of filings actually claiming plasma or ion-source hardware rather than just the resulting film. That 41.8% share is the more useful cut for distinguishing equipment claims from composition claims.
The US and Europe carry the bulk of filing activity
The United States receives the largest single share of filings at 199 records, with Europe (EPO) second at 112 and WIPO PCT filings at 50. South Korea, Japan and Australia each carry meaningfully smaller counts, which should inform where freedom-to-operate searches get prioritised.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to physical vapor deposition: reactive sputter control patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Cardinal CG Company | HARTIG KLAUS | 3 |
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | 2 |
| iFire Technology | KOSYACHKOV ALEXANDER | 2 |
| Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | 1 |
| Cardinal CG Company | STEBBINS DAVID | 1 |
| Cardinal CG Company | STANEK ROGER | 1 |
| Oerlikon Surface Solutions AG Pfaffikon | Oerlikon Surface Solutions AG Pfaffikon | 1 |
| Triplex Safety Glass Co Ltd | MOLINEAU P | 1 |
Only 9 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pairs link a single company to a small number of named individual inventors rather than to another corporate assignee — a sign that this technology is mostly developed and filed in-house rather than through joint ventures.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next questions rather than a single conclusion.
Map the white space inside H01J overlap
The gap between the 97.9% C23C share and the 41.8% H01J share is where hardware-control claims are thinnest relative to coating claims — worth a closer look before drafting new claims in that zone.
Explore white space in Eureka →Track the long tail, not just the leader
With 19.6% concentration at the top five filers, most competitive signal sits in the remaining ranked companies rather than in a single dominant player.
Run a competitor watch in Eureka →Re-check 2025–2026 filings once they settle
Publication lag means the most recent two years understate real filing activity; revisit the trend once those years are closer to complete.
Set a filing alert in Eureka →Common questions on reactive sputter control patents
It covers methods and hardware for regulating a reactive gas, typically oxygen or nitrogen, during sputtering so the deposited film reaches a target stoichiometry rather than drifting into a fully metallic or fully poisoned target state. In this dataset that includes both plasma and discharge-tube hardware claims and coating-composition claims, since a single filing can touch both. The search scope pulls from C23C coating classifications together with claim language around reactive sputter or PVD control, which is why coating classifications appear in nearly all 576 records.
The ranked assignee list covers 100 companies drawn from 576 records, led by a single filer with 31 records ahead of a fifth-place company at 18 and a tenth-place company at 10. The top five combined hold 19.6% of all 576 records, and the top ten hold 29.5%, which means the majority of filing activity sits outside the most active names. Equipment and glass-coating companies feature prominently, reflecting that gas-ratio control is largely a tooling problem rather than an end-product one.
Filings peaked at 14 records in 2018 and have declined since; the 2021-to-2024 span alone shows a 57% drop, from 7 records to 3. That comparison uses only completed years, since publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete and not yet comparable. Based on the completed years available, the trend reads as a genuine cooling rather than a plateau.
C23C, covering coating and surface deposition, appears in 97.9% of the 576 records and effectively defines the search scope. H01J, covering electron and discharge tubes, appears in 41.8% of records and marks the plasma-hardware side of the technology — filings that claim the ionization or discharge apparatus rather than just the resulting film. Smaller but notable shares include H01L semiconductor devices at 13.4% and C03C glass compositions at 8.3%, showing where the underlying control technology gets applied downstream.
The United States carries the largest share of filings among receiving offices at 199 records, followed by Europe through the EPO at 112 and WIPO PCT filings at 50. South Korea, Japan and Australia hold smaller but still meaningful counts. Given that concentration at the top of the assignee ranking is modest at 19.6% for the top five, a freedom-to-operate search needs to cover the broader ranked list rather than assuming a small number of companies hold the relevant claims.
Research Physical Vapor Deposition: Reactive Sputter Control Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole physical vapor deposition: reactive sputter control patent landscape 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.