Smart Parking Systems Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Accelerating, not mature. filings sit at 0 in 2017 and reach 18 in 2025, the peak year so far, with growth still climbing through the 2022 midpoint of 5.
- No single filer controls the field. the leader holds 3 records and the top 5 combined account for just 18.5% of all 65 records in scope — concentration is shallow.
- Filing activity is unusually India-heavy. 46 of the tracked filings route through the Indian receiving office, well ahead of the United States at 8 and China at 5.
What the smart parking system patent record actually shows
Smart parking systems sit at the intersection of traffic control, payment processing and building infrastructure — a combination visible directly in the IPC mix, where G08G traffic-control classifications cover 92.3% of the 65 records in scope and G06Q business-data-processing classifications cover 52.3%. That overlap is the practical definition of the field: an occupancy sensor or garage layout only becomes a patentable system once it is tied to guidance, reservation or fare logic.
The dataset covers 65 published records filed between 2017 and 2026, with the most recent year necessarily undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. Read the 2026 figure as a floor, not a ceiling.
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 65 records: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filings climbed from zero to a 2025 peak
Annual filings moved from 0 in 2017 through 5 at the 2022 midpoint to a peak of 18 in 2025, indicating the field is still in an accelerating phase rather than plateauing. The partial 2026 count should not be read as a slowdown.
Traffic control and payment logic dominate the classification mix
G08G (traffic control) appears on 92.3% of records and G06Q (business/commerce data processing) on 52.3%, with G07B (ticketing and fare-registering) close behind at 44.6%. Image/video recognition (G06V, 12.3%) and hybrid vehicle control (B60W, 10.8%) are present but comparatively thin, and since records can carry multiple classes these shares do not sum to 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 65 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Smart Parking Systems with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about smart parking systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
Method and parking guidance system for assigning a parking space for a vehicle and for navigating the vehicle to the parking space
A parking guidance system and method allocate a parking space for a vehicle and navigate the vehicle to it. The system uses a detection unit to identify the occupancy state of a parking space or area, and at least one mobile terminal through which a driver's request — including instantaneous vehicle position data — reaches the system. The system selects an available space matching the request and transmits a selection suggestion back to the driver.Filed by GRAPHMASTERS SA, published 2023-04-06 as US20230107149A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20070050240A1 | Wireless Parking Guidance System | 288 |
| 2 | US20090148259A1 | Automated Vehicle Parking Garage with Catwalk Installation | 94 |
| 3 | US20140149153A1 | Method and system for dynamic parking allocation in urban settings | 69 |
| 4 | US20140139359A1 | Parking guidance system and method based on vehicle human occupancy | 25 |
| 5 | US20170206785A1 | Vision sensing system for smart parking | 15 |
| 6 | CN103122719A | 一种自动车库 | 15 |
| 7 | WO2007027945A1 | Wireless parking guidance system | 11 |
| 8 | US9123246B2 | Parking guidance system and method based on vehicle human occupancy | 10 |
| 9 | US20230107149A1 | Method and parking guidance system for assigning a parking space for a vehicle and for navigating the vehicle… | 8 |
| 10 | CN104103193A | 基于手持终端的停车场诱导停车系统及诱导停车方法 | 4 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside the searched corpus — treat them as a signal of influence on the field, not of 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 or freedom-to-operate decision
Three figures matter more than the raw counts: how thin the concentration is at the top, how young the filing curve still is, and where the geographic weight actually sits.
No single assignee has locked up the category
The leader holds only 3 of 65 records, and the top 5 combined account for 18.5% of all records in scope — rising to 32.3% across the top 10. That is a shallow concentration curve for a field this narrowly defined, meaning a well-drafted new filing is unlikely to run straight into a dominant blocking portfolio.
Filing activity is still accelerating, not settling
Volume moved from 0 in 2017 to 5 at the 2022 midpoint to 18 in 2025. That trajectory — plus a partial but non-trivial 2026 count — points to a technology area where claim space is still being actively staked out rather than consolidated.
Filing activity is unusually concentrated in one jurisdiction
India accounts for 46 of the tracked filings, well ahead of the United States (8), China (5), WIPO/PCT (3), the Philippines (2) and Canada (1). Any competitive-intelligence read of this field needs to treat the Indian office as the primary signal source, not a secondary one.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to smart parking systems, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders top out at 3 records each, and momentum among the most active recent filers is modest rather than surging — this is a field of many small filers, not a two-horse race.
The top of the ranking is thin
With the leading assignee holding just 3 records and fifth place holding 2, no single organisation has built a portfolio deep enough to dictate design-around costs across the category.
Co-filing is limited and mostly one-off
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest of them is a two-filing collaboration. Joint R&D structures are not yet a defining feature of this field's patent activity.
Recent-year activity is flat across the visible leaders
The assignees with any latest-year activity show only 1 filing each with 0% year-over-year change where measured, while several previously active filers show 0 in the latest year — recent momentum has not consolidated around any one player yet.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| NITTE(DEEMED TO BE UNIV) | 1 | — |
| EASWARI ENG COLLEGE | 1 | 0% |
| Lovely Professional University | 0 | — |
| GRAPHMASTERS SA | 0 | — |
| Xerox Corporation | 0 | — |
| SHANI HAIM | 0 | — |
| SENSACT APPLICATIONS INC | 0 | — |
| GENG YANFENG | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next questions rather than a single conclusion — use them to decide where to file, watch or dig deeper.
Check freedom-to-operate against the most-cited prior art
The five highest-citation records, led by a wireless parking guidance filing cited 288 times, define the baseline prior art that any new occupancy-detection or guidance claim has to be drafted around.
Explore prior art in EurekaTrack the India-heavy filing pattern going forward
With 46 of the tracked filings routed through India against 8 in the United States, monitoring that office closely will surface new entrants earlier than watching US or PCT filings alone.
Set up jurisdiction trackingWatch the under-claimed branches before they fill in
Vision-based occupancy detection and robotic retrieval sit well below the core traffic-control and payment classes in filing share, which is where a first-mover claim still has room to land cleanly.
Draft a claim scope in EurekaCommon questions about smart parking system patents
No single organisation dominates this field: the top-ranked assignee holds only 3 of the 65 records in scope, and the top 5 combined account for 18.5% of all records. That is a shallow concentration curve compared with more mature transportation-technology categories. Fifth place holds 2 records and tenth place holds 1, meaning the ranking has a long tail of single- or double-filing entrants rather than a small group of dominant players. Anyone assessing competitive risk should look at the specific claim scope of individual filings rather than assume a portfolio-level blocking position from any one company.
Filing activity has grown from 0 in 2017 to a peak of 18 in 2025, passing through a midpoint of 5 in 2022, which indicates the field is still in an accelerating phase rather than levelling off. The 2026 count is partial because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the true current-year volume is understated in any dataset cut off mid-year. Based on the trajectory through 2025, filing volume is more likely to keep rising than to plateau in the near term. This makes the field one where claim space is still actively being staked out.
The dominant classification is G08G (traffic control systems), present on 92.3% of the 65 records in scope, reflecting that most filings frame parking guidance as a traffic-management problem. G06Q (business, commerce and administrative data processing) covers 52.3% of records, capturing reservation and payment logic, and G07B (ticket and fare-registering) covers 44.6%. Narrower classes like G06V (image and video recognition, 12.3%) and B60W (hybrid vehicle control, 10.8%) are present but thinner, marking areas with comparatively less filing density. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed.
India leads by a wide margin with 46 of the tracked filings, followed by the United States with 8 and China with 5. WIPO/PCT filings account for 3, with the Philippines at 2 and Canada at 1. This distribution is unusually concentrated in a single jurisdiction compared with many other transportation-technology patent landscapes, so competitive monitoring focused only on US or European filings would miss the majority of activity in this dataset.
US20230107149A1, filed by Graphmasters SA and published 2023-04-06, describes a parking guidance system that detects occupancy state via a detection unit, receives a driver's space request with live position data through a mobile terminal, and selects and suggests an available space matching that request. Anyone building a similar occupancy-to-navigation pipeline should review its claim language closely, particularly around the combination of occupancy detection with position-aware space selection and driver notification. It sits alongside older, more heavily cited prior art such as the wireless parking guidance filing cited 288 times, so a full freedom-to-operate review should not treat this one filing in isolation.
Research Smart Parking Systems in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole smart parking systems 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.