Quantum Dot LED Chip Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing has cooled since 2018. The peak year was 2018 at 16 published families; by the 2022 midpoint annual output had dropped to 3, and the trend has stayed flat or declining since.
- China now dominates the filing venue. 46 of 92 records were filed at the China receiving office, roughly one and a half times the 29 filed in the United States, with PCT, EPO, Canada and Singapore trailing far behind.
- Collaboration is rare in this dataset. Only 2 co-assignee pairs appear across 92 families, both university-linked, meaning most claim positions here were built solo rather than through joint filing.
Filing growth compares 2021 (9 records) with 2024 (7) — 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 92 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the quantum dot LED chip patent record shows
Quantum dot LED (QLED) chip patenting sits at the intersection of display electronics and nanomaterials science, and the IPC composition of this dataset reflects that split: H01L (semiconductor devices) and H10K (organic semiconductors, including OLED-adjacent structures) account for the bulk of records, while B82Y (nanotechnology) and C09K (materials) form a smaller but consistent secondary cluster. The most-cited records in the corpus, several sharing the title Quantum dot spacing for high efficiency quantum dot LED displays, point to spacing and device-architecture claims as an early and heavily referenced foundation for later filings.
Published filings ran from 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, peaking in 2018 and falling since; because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one or two years in any such trend will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be. Read the 2018 peak and the post-2022 decline as directional signals rather than a final verdict on where activity stands today.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 92-family dataset: how filing volume moved year over year, and how those families distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings opened at 14 in 2017, rose to a peak of 16 in 2018, and had fallen to 3 by the 2022 midpoint; the 2026 figure of 0 reflects the partial year and publication lag rather than a hard stop.
IPC subclass composition
H01L (65 records) and H10K (56) lead the classification profile, with B82Y (17) and C09K (15) marking the nanomaterials and phosphor-chemistry side of the same filings; smaller counts in H10D, C08G, C08K and C09D show where device engineering meets polymer and coating formulation.
Shares are the percentage of the 92 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Quantum Dot LED LED Chip with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about quantum dot led led chip and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited and most representative filings
US20240099043A1 — QLED and preparation method thereof
The application claims a quantum dot light-emitting diode built from an anode and cathode with a quantum dot luminescent layer between them, and an electron transport layer (ETL) positioned between the luminescent layer and the cathode. The claimed ETL is defined narrowly: either a zinc oxide film with surface hydroxyl content at or below 0.4, or a zinc oxide layer whose surface carries an amino and/or carboxyl ligand of 3 to 7 carbon atoms. That surface-chemistry control on the zinc oxide transport layer is the operative inventive feature.Filed by TCL Technology Group Corporation, published 2024-03-21.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20180019371A1 | Quantum dot spacing for high efficiency quantum dot LED displays | 122 |
| 2 | US20170271605A1 | Quantum dot spacing for high efficiency quantum dot LED displays | 65 |
| 3 | US9768404B1 | Quantum dot spacing for high efficiency quantum dot LED displays | 56 |
| 4 | CN105206718A | 一种溶液法制备的CsPbX3无机钙钛矿量子点发光二极管 | 52 |
| 5 | US20190103571A1 | QUANTUM DOT LIGHT EMITTING DEVICES (QLEDs) AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURE | 30 |
| 6 | CN106384767A | 量子点发光二极管及其制备方法与发光模组、显示装置 | 24 |
| 7 | CN109935661A | 正型QLED器件及其制备方法 | 18 |
| 8 | CN106784191A | QLED器件及其制备方法 | 18 |
| 9 | WO2019071362A1 | Multiple-layer quantum-dot LED and method of fabricating same | 13 |
| 10 | CN106784202A | QLED器件及其制备方法 | 13 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favour older filings; treat them as a marker of foundational status, not current commercial relevance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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
Three read-outs from the trend, venue and citation data that matter more for strategy than the raw counts alone.
Volume has cooled from its 2018 high
The dataset's peak of 16 families in 2018 gave way to a midpoint of 3 in 2022 and near-zero in the still-publishing final years. Given the 18-month lag between filing and publication, the true 2024-2025 count is understated, but the multi-year decline through the midpoint is a real signal that new entrants are not flooding this space the way they were in 2017-2018.
China is the primary filing venue, not a secondary one
With 46 of 92 records filed in China against 29 in the United States, and single-digit counts everywhere else, prosecution and freedom-to-operate work in this field now centres on Chinese patent practice as much as, or more than, US practice.
Joint filings are the exception, not the rule
Only two co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, both linking Chinese universities to each other or to a materials company. The near-absence of joint filing suggests claim positions here were staked out independently rather than built through cross-licensing or joint ventures.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to quantum dot led led chip, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds ground, and where it is thin
Recent-year momentum across the named assignees in this dataset shows uniformly flat activity in the latest tracked year, which is consistent with the broader post-2018 decline rather than any single company's retreat.
Flat activity across the field's most active filers
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, from large Chinese display groups to a US technology company and a Japanese electronics maker, shows zero filings in the latest year in this dataset. That flatness matches the overall filing trend rather than signalling any one company exiting the space.
Chinese assignees anchor volume
The concentration of filings at the China receiving office lines up with a roster of Chinese corporate and university assignees appearing repeatedly in the dataset, spanning display manufacturers and materials-focused universities.
A crowded but loosely connected assignee base
With 92 families and only two recorded co-assignee pairs, most participants are filing independently. That leaves room for licensing or joint-development entrants who can pair materials expertise with device-integration know-how.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| TCL Technology Group Corporation | 0 | — |
| 10644137 Canada Inc. | 0 | — |
| Southern University of Science and Technology | 0 | -100% |
| BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Apple Inc. | 0 | — |
| Sharp Corporation | 0 | — |
| Beijing Jiaotong University | 0 | — |
| Zhejiang University | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with concentrated device-architecture prior art and thinner coverage on materials formulation. Two directions follow from that.
Check freedom-to-operate on ETL surface chemistry
Zinc oxide electron-transport-layer surface treatment, as claimed in the representative TCL filing, sits on relatively specific claim language. Before designing around it, map the exact hydroxyl-content and ligand-chain-length boundaries against your own formulation.
Explore ETL claims in EurekaAssess the thinner materials-side branches
C08G, C08K and C09D each carry only a handful of records against 65 in H01L, suggesting polymer-additive and coating-ink approaches to quantum dot layers are comparatively under-claimed.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions about quantum dot LED chip patents
This dataset's assignee ranking is dominated by a mix of large Chinese display manufacturers, Chinese universities, and a handful of international electronics companies, with Chinese entities filing far more heavily at the China receiving office than elsewhere. No single assignee shows growth in the latest tracked year; momentum across the named leaders sits flat. Anyone assessing competitive position should look at the full ranking table rather than assume the largest historical filer is still the most active one today.
Not based on this dataset. Filings peaked at 16 in 2018, fell to 3 by the 2022 midpoint, and have continued to decline through the most recent tracked years. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the very latest years are understated, but the multi-year downward trend through the midpoint is unlikely to be fully explained by lag alone. Treat the space as mature and consolidating rather than expanding.
China receives the largest share of filings in this dataset at 46 of 92 records, followed by the United States at 29. WIPO/PCT, European, Canadian and Singaporean filings each account for single digits. A freedom-to-operate review focused only on US or European patents would miss the majority of the documented filing activity in this field.
US20240099043A1, filed by TCL Technology Group Corporation and published in 2024, claims a quantum dot LED with a specifically engineered zinc oxide electron transport layer: either a film with surface hydroxyl content at or below 0.4, or a zinc oxide surface carrying an amino and/or carboxyl ligand with 3 to 7 carbon atoms. The inventive core is the surface chemistry of that transport layer, not the general QLED stack architecture, which is well established in prior art. Designing around it means altering the transport layer's surface treatment outside those defined parameters.
The IPC composition shows heavy concentration in H01L and H10K device-architecture classes, with comparatively thin coverage in C08G, C08K and C09D, the classes covering polymer host matrices, polymer additives and coating or ink formulations for the quantum dot layer. That imbalance suggests device-structure claim space is more occupied than materials-formulation claim space. It does not guarantee formulation approaches are novel, only that fewer published families in this dataset have staked claims there.
Research Quantum Dot LED LED Chip in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole quantum dot led led chip 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.