Plasma Doping Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
Plasma Doping and Alternative Doping Methods Patents
Concentrated at the top. The five most active filers hold 160 of 231 records in scope (69.3%), and the top ten hold 192 (83.1%) — this field is not a long tail story. Filings ran at a low but steady pace through the period, peaking at 4 in 2017. Recent years trend down toward the 2026 cut-off, but publication lag of roughly 18 months means the final one to two years understate true filing activity.
- 1VARIAN SEMICON EQUIP ASSC INC59
- 2PANASONIC HOLDINGS CORP51
- 3MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC20
- 4APPLIED MATERIALS INC16
- 5TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING CO LTD14
See the full plasma doping and alternative doping methods analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions on plasma doping patents
Who holds the most patents in plasma doping and conformal doping?
Filings are concentrated: the leading assignee holds 59 of the 231 records in scope, more than four times the tenth-place holder’s 5. The top five assignees together account for 160 records, or 69.3% of everything in scope, and the top ten account for 192, or 83.1%. That means most freedom-to-operate work in this field should start with those leading holders rather than a broad search across all 73 ranked companies.
Is plasma doping still an active area of patent filing?
Filing activity peaked at 4 records in 2017 and recent-year counts trend toward zero, with every major tracked assignee showing flat or -100% year-on-year movement in the latest recorded year. Some of that apparent slowdown is real, but publication lag of roughly 18 months means the most recent one to two years are understated in any patent dataset, so treat the very latest figures as provisional rather than final.
What does US20070176124A1 actually cover?
This Matsushita (Panasonic) filing from 2007 covers a plasma doping method that maintains uniform dose across repeated treatments by managing a maintenance step for film buildup on the vacuum chamber’s inner wall. It is a process-control claim aimed at repeatability rather than a claim on plasma doping broadly, so it constrains chamber-maintenance and dose-uniformity approaches more than it blocks doping methods generally.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Plasma Doping and Alternative Doping Methods covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.