Printable Inks for Flexible Hybrid Electronics Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 15 records and has since pulled back — 2021's 12 filings fell to 2 by 2024, an 83% drop over that span, though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in under the usual publication lag.
- The top 5 filers hold 36.8% of all 136 records while the top 10 combined reach 62.5% — concentration at the front, then a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants across the remaining 66 ranked companies.
- H01L and H05K each cover roughly a quarter of records showing this field sits as much in semiconductor and printed-circuit integration as it does in the ink chemistry itself (C09D, 22.8%) or powder metallurgy (B22F, 22.1%).
Filing growth compares 2021 (12 records) with 2024 (2) — 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 136 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape covers 136 published patent records filed between 2015 and 2026 that combine printable conductive ink chemistry — stretchable conductive inks, silver nanoparticle inks — with the physical and process constraints that make an ink usable in flexible hybrid electronics: bending-cycle durability, sheet resistance change under strain, low-temperature sintering, screen-mesh printability, encapsulation compatibility and substrate compatibility. It sits at the intersection of ink formulation and device integration rather than in ink chemistry alone, which is why classes as different as H01L (semiconductor devices) and C09D (coatings, paints and inks) both carry a substantial share of the records.
Records were pulled to the same cut-off date of 2026-07-31, using patent families as the counting unit so that continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction copies of the same invention are not double-counted in the concentration and trend figures below.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 136-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how the records split across the IPC subclasses that define the field's boundaries.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 5 in 2017 to a peak of 15 in 2020, then declined — 2021's 12 fell to 2 by 2024, an 83% drop over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 show fewer records, but publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so those two years understate actual filing activity and should not be read as a further slowdown.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
H01L (semiconductor devices, 26.5% of records) and H05K (printed circuits, 25.7%) lead, closely followed by C09D (coatings and inks, 22.8%) and B22F (powder metallurgy, 22.1%). A61B (diagnosis and surgery, 15.4%) points to a meaningful wearable-sensor and medical-monitoring thread within the corpus. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to well over 100% and should be read against the 136-record total, not against each other.
Shares are the percentage of the 136 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Printable Inks for Flexible Hybrid Electronics with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about printable inks for flexible hybrid electronics and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
Reducing agent for low temperature reducing and sintering of copper nanoparticles, and method for low temperature sintering using the same
The present invention relates to a reducing agent for low temperature reducing and sintering of copper nanoparticles and a method for low temperature sintering using the same. The reducing agent includes formic acid or acetic acid and C1 to C3 alcohol or ether which allows reducing and sintering at a low temperature of less than 250°C. The sintered copper nanoparticles provide excellent electrical properties and are suitable for forming fine wirings patterns.Filed by Samsung Electro-Mechanics, published 2010-03-04 — predates most of this dataset's activity and anchors the low-temperature sintering approach that later filers had to design around or license.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20060189113A1 | Metal nanoparticle compositions | 329 |
| 2 | US20060163744A1 | Printable electrical conductors | 321 |
| 3 | US20110277813A1 | Arrays of Ultrathin Silicon Solar Microcells | 176 |
| 4 | US20180055359A1 | Wound dressing with reusable electronics for wireless monitoring | 152 |
| 5 | WO2006076603A2 | Printable electrical conductors | 144 |
| 6 | US8679888B2 | Arrays of ultrathin silicon solar microcells | 138 |
| 7 | WO2010036807A1 | Arrays of ultrathin silicon solar microcells | 134 |
| 8 | US20140216524A1 | Arrays of ultrathin silicon solar microcells | 102 |
| 9 | EP1683592A1 | Fine metal particles and fine metal oxide particles in dry powder form, and use thereof | 96 |
| 10 | US20070154634A1 | Method and Apparatus for Low-Temperature Plasma Sintering | 95 |
Citation counts inside this corpus skew toward older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations — treat them as a signal of influence on later work, not as a ranking of current importance.
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 data means for filing strategy
Three findings that change where a new filing or freedom-to-operate search should focus.
The front of the field is crowded, the tail is long
The top 5 filers hold 36.8% of all 136 records and the top 10 hold 62.5%, meaning over a third of activity sits outside any of the leading ten organisations. That tail is where freedom-to-operate risk is lower but prior art is also thinner and harder to search.
Peak filing has passed, at least on record dates
2020's peak of 15 filings gave way to a marked decline through 2024. Several leading assignees in the recent-year momentum data show zero filings in the latest year, which is consistent with either consolidation of the technology into fewer active programmes or a genuine cooling of new entrants.
Integration classes rival the ink chemistry classes
H01L (semiconductor devices) and H05K (printed circuits) each cover roughly a quarter of records, on par with or ahead of C09D, the coatings-and-inks class itself. Filers who only search ink-chemistry classifications will miss a large share of relevant prior art sitting in device-integration classes.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to printable inks for flexible hybrid electronics, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps are
The ranked list covers 76 companies across the full 136-record set. Filing is led by a small group of ink formulators, materials suppliers and research institutions, with momentum data showing several of the most active historical filers at zero filings in the latest tracked year.
A single leader, then a fast drop-off
The top-ranked assignee holds 12 records; by fifth place that figure is already down to 8, and by tenth place to 6. The gap between first and fifth is narrow relative to the gap between tenth and the rest of the 76-company ranking.
Historical leaders have gone quiet recently
Multiple assignees with strong historical filing counts, including one showing a -100% year-on-year change, recorded zero filings in the most recent tracked year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this may partly reflect filings still working through the pipeline rather than a full stop.
US-centred filing, with meaningful EPO and PCT activity
The United States receives the largest share of filings at 69, followed by Europe (EPO) at 25 and WIPO/PCT at 21. India, Germany and the UK each register single-digit counts, suggesting the core competitive battleground remains US and European rights rather than broad multi-jurisdiction coverage.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Liquid Wire Inc. | 0 | — |
| Cabot Corp | 0 | — |
| Optomec Design Co | 0 | — |
| TE Connectivity Corp | 0 | — |
| Harima Chemicals Inc | 0 | — |
| NANOFLEX POWER CORP | 0 | -100% |
| Energy Materials Corp | 0 | -100% |
| The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois | 0 | -100% |
Turning this landscape into a filing decision
The figures above show where the field stands; the next step is usually a narrower search against a specific claim scope or competitor set.
Run a freedom-to-operate check
Concentration at the top 10 (62.5% of records) means a new filing in the core ink-chemistry classes needs a direct check against those assignees' active families, not just a keyword search.
Explore in Eureka →Map the white space claims
The under-claimed sub-areas above are starting points, not finished claim language — validating them against live filings before drafting saves rework later.
Explore in Eureka →Track momentum, not just totals
Several leading assignees show zero recent-year filings; watching whether that continues past the publication-lag window will clarify whether the field is consolidating or cooling.
Explore in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The ranked list covers 76 companies across 136 records, led by a single assignee with 12 records, with the fifth-ranked filer at 8 and the tenth at 6. The top 5 combined hold 36.8% of all records and the top 10 hold 62.5%, so filing is concentrated at the front but far from monopolised — over a third of activity comes from outside the leading ten organisations. Company names visible in the underlying data include ink and materials suppliers, contract manufacturers and research institutions rather than a single dominant industrial player.
Filing peaked in 2020 at 15 records and declined afterward, with 2021's 12 filings falling to 2 by 2024 — an 83% drop over that three-year span. Numbers for 2025 and 2026 look lower still, but publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so those two years are incomplete rather than necessarily reflecting a real drop. Treat 2024 as the most recent year with a reasonably complete picture.
The dataset spans several IPC subclasses beyond pure ink chemistry: H01L (semiconductor devices) covers 26.5% of the 136 records, H05K (printed circuits and assemblies) covers 25.7%, C09D (coatings, paints and inks) covers 22.8%, and B22F (powder metallurgy) covers 22.1%. A61B (diagnosis and surgery) appears in 15.4% of records, reflecting a wearable-sensor and medical-monitoring application thread. Because a single record can carry multiple classes, these percentages overlap and add up to more than 100%.
US20100055302A1, assigned to Samsung Electro-Mechanics and published in 2010, covers a reducing agent for low-temperature reduction and sintering of copper nanoparticles using formic or acetic acid combined with a C1-C3 alcohol or ether, enabling sintering below 250°C. It is narrowly drawn to that specific reagent chemistry and copper nanoparticle sintering, so it constrains that exact formulation route rather than low-temperature sintering broadly. Filers working with silver nanoparticle inks, different reducing agent chemistries, or alternative sintering mechanisms sit outside its literal claim scope, though a detailed claim chart is needed before relying on that as a design-around.
The technology composition data shows heavier filing density in device-integration classes like H01L and H05K than in some of the process-specific sub-areas — bending-cycle durability testing, encapsulation adhesion for stretchable substrates, sheet-resistance drift compensation, and substrate-specific low-temperature sintering profiles all show fewer dedicated filings relative to the broader classes around them. That does not guarantee those areas are unpatented, but it does mean they warrant a closer, narrower search before assuming the space is occupied. Combined with a long tail of 66 companies below the top 10, there is room for a differentiated claim that does not directly collide with the leading filers' core scope.
Research Printable Inks for Flexible Hybrid Electronics in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole printable inks for flexible hybrid electronics 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.