Satellite Phased Array Antenna Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Flat filing trend, not a growth curve. Filings peaked in 2024 at 15 and the midpoint year (2022) sat at 12 — this is a mature, occupied claim space rather than an emerging one.
- Antenna-in-package methods dominate the IPC mix. H01Q carries all 164 records, but additive manufacturing (B33Y) and powder metallurgy (B22F) show up as secondary process routes worth checking before you file.
- US filings lead by a wide margin. 68 records route through the United States against 39 through the EPO and 16 through WIPO's PCT track, showing where enforcement risk concentrates first.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families describing manufacturing and integration processes for satellite phased array and electronically steered antennas — antenna-in-package fabrication, flat-panel array construction and beamformer integration — rather than the RF design of the antenna elements themselves. The search combines antenna-specific title/abstract terms with IPC classes covering antenna structures (H01Q21), semiconductor packaging (H01L23/66) and steerable-beam antenna configurations (H01Q1/38), so records that only describe circuit-level beamforming without a fabrication claim are largely excluded. 164 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 make up the corpus.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 counts in the trend chart are undercounts of actual filing activity — treat the most recent one to two years as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 164-family corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend: flat, with a 2024 peak
Filings held roughly level through the window, rising to a peak of 15 in 2024 after sitting at 12 at the 2022 midpoint. There is no sustained acceleration visible in the data — this looks like a settled process space where incumbents are refiling around known architectures rather than a field being newly opened up.
IPC composition: antenna structure claims dominate
Every record in the corpus carries an H01Q antenna classification, as expected given the search construction. The secondary classes are the more informative signal: waveguide and microwave-element claims (H01P, 14 records), powder metallurgy and additive manufacturing (B22F and B33Y, 12 and 9 records) and plastics shaping (B29C, B29L) point to metal 3D printing and moulded dielectric structures as the process routes assignees are actually patenting around, alongside the more traditional printed-circuit integration path (H05K, only 3 records).
Shares are the percentage of the 164 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Satellite Phased Array Antenna Manufacturing Process with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about satellite phased array antenna manufacturing process and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art in this space
Phased array antenna and method of manufacturing the same
A relatively small phased array antenna is formed at a low cost even if the number of radiating elements increases in order to improve the gain. The phased array antenna has a multilayered structure in which a number of radiating elements, a phase shift unit for changing the phase of an RF signal transmitted or received at each radiating element, and a distribution/synthesis unit are formed on different layers. Signal and scanning lines are wired on a phase control layer to connect phase shift units to each other in a matrix, driven by selection units so that desired phase shift amounts are set across the array.Filed by NEC Corporation; granted 2003-05-06.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6396440B1 | Phased array antenna apparatus | 287 |
| 2 | US6670930B2 | Antenna-integrated printed wiring board assembly for a phased array antenna system | 236 |
| 3 | US20120306708A1 | Antenna system | 232 |
| 4 | US6424313B1 | Three dimensional packaging architecture for phased array antenna elements | 140 |
| 5 | US9203149B2 | Antenna system | 138 |
| 6 | US20140111396A1 | Dual Band Interleaved Phased Array Antenna | 77 |
| 7 | US6559798B1 | Phased array antenna and method of manufacturing the same | 57 |
| 8 | US6535168B1 | Phased array antenna and method of manufacturing method | 48 |
| 9 | US6989791B2 | Antenna-integrated printed wiring board assembly for a phased array antenna system | 47 |
| 10 | US6496147B1 | Active phased array antenna and antenna controller | 42 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial relevance.
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-throughs from the trend, classification and citation data that matter more than the raw counts.
Growth has plateaued, not accelerated
The rise from 12 filings at the 2022 midpoint to a peak of 15 in 2024 is modest for a five-year window. Combined with an undercounted 2025-2026 tail, this reads as a mature process space rather than one still being staked out.
Additive manufacturing is a real secondary claim area
Powder metallurgy (12 records) and additive manufacturing (9 records) classifications sitting alongside the core H01Q antenna claims indicate assignees are patenting 3D-printed and metal-sintered structural elements as part of the antenna build, not just the RF design.
Enforcement risk concentrates in the US first
United States filings outnumber EPO filings by a wide margin, with WIPO/PCT and Canadian filings well behind. A freedom-to-operate check for this process area should start with the US portfolio before extending to Europe or Canada.
The most influential prior art predates the current filing wave
The highest-cited records in the corpus were granted well before the 2022-2024 filing peak, which is typical of citation counts within a searched corpus — they measure historical influence, not which claims control the current generation of designs.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to satellite phased array antenna manufacturing process, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and how concentrated is it
Momentum data shows recent-year filings at zero across the named assignees tracked here, which is consistent with the flat overall trend and the 18-month publication lag rather than a sign these companies have exited the space.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated
Only seven co-assignee pairs appear in the corpus, and the strongest of them link a single organisation with named individual inventors or an affiliated sensing subsidiary. This is largely a single-assignee filing pattern rather than one built on joint ventures.
Recent-year counts read low across the board
Every tracked assignee shows zero filings in the latest year in the momentum data. Given the 18-month publication lag, this is best read as an artefact of the data cut-off rather than firms stepping back from the space.
Filing strategy is US-anchored with a European hedge
The receiving-office split — US, EPO, WIPO, Canada, Norway and Australia — shows a primary US filing strategy with EPO and PCT routes used as a secondary hedge, and comparatively thin coverage in Canada, Norway and Australia.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Boeing Company | 0 | — |
| NEC Corporation | 0 | — |
| Meta Materials Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) | 0 | — |
| Raytheon Company | 0 | — |
| BAE Systems plc | 0 | — |
| Panasonic Corporation (Japan) | 0 | — |
| BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a few concrete next steps for teams deciding where to file or where to watch.
Map the additive-manufacturing overlap
B22F and B33Y classifications sit inside a corpus that is nominally about antenna structures. Pulling those records out for a closer read shows which specific 3D-printed or sintered components are already claimed before committing a new structural design.
Explore additive manufacturing claimsCheck freedom-to-operate in the US first
With 68 of the tracked filings routed through the United States, a design clearance search for a new manufacturing process should prioritise US claims before extending to the thinner EPO, Canadian or Australian coverage.
Run a US-first FTO checkRevisit the printed-circuit integration gap
Only 3 records carry an H05K classification against 164 for H01Q overall, suggesting printed-circuit-based beamformer integration is comparatively open relative to the antenna-structure claims that dominate the corpus.
Assess the H05K white spaceCommon questions on this landscape
Filing in this space is concentrated among a small set of aerospace and electronics manufacturers, with a long tail of single-filing entrants behind them. The assignee ranking table on this page renders the current order directly from the 164-family corpus rather than a fixed list, because relative position shifts as new publications are added. What is consistent across the data is that recent-year momentum for the named leaders reads as zero, which is more a function of the roughly 18-month publication lag than of firms exiting the field.
The trend is flat rather than growing. Filings sat at 12 in 2022 and peaked at 15 in 2024, which is a modest move for a five-year window, and the 2025-2026 figures are undercounted because of publication lag. Read this as a mature, occupied process space where assignees are refiling around known architectures rather than a technology still being staked out for the first time.
The core claims sit in antenna structure and packaging (H01Q, H01L23/66), but the secondary IPC classes are the more useful signal. Powder metallurgy and additive manufacturing classifications appear across roughly a dozen records each, pointing to metal-sintered and 3D-printed structural elements as an active process route, alongside more traditional printed-circuit-board integration, which is comparatively thin in this corpus at only 3 records.
The United States carries the largest share of filings in this corpus at 68 records, roughly 1.7 times the EPO's 39. WIPO/PCT filings sit further behind at 16, with Canada, Norway and Australia each in single digits. A practical freedom-to-operate search should prioritise US claims first and treat EPO coverage as the next tier, rather than spreading effort evenly across all six receiving offices.
High citation counts in this corpus belong to older records — the top-cited filing here dates back well before the recent filing peak — and citation counts inside a searched corpus structurally favour older documents because they have had more time to accumulate citations. That makes citation rank a signal of historical influence on the field, not a reliable indicator of which claims currently control commercial designs; a claim-by-claim read of recent filings is still necessary to assess present-day blocking risk.
Research Satellite Phased Array Antenna Manufacturing Process in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole satellite phased array antenna manufacturing process 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.