Solid-State Supercapacitor Integration Patents: Small Field, Concentrated Leaders 2026
- Thin filing base. just 13 published families sit at the intersection of solid-state supercapacitors and on-chip, flexible-device or energy-system integration — a niche, not a crowded field.
- Filing peaked and stalled. activity spiked to 10 filings in 2018 and has since dropped to near zero, with the 2022 midpoint at a single filing.
- Battery-class IPC dominates. 12 of 13 records sit in H01M (batteries, cells & fuel cells) versus 4 in H01G (capacitors proper), showing the field is claimed mostly as hybrid energy-storage architecture.
A narrow, thinly filed intersection
Solid-state supercapacitor system integration sits at the overlap of two established fields: solid-state energy storage and device-level integration, whether on-chip, flexible, or embedded in a wider energy system. The dataset behind this page captures only 13 published patent families across roughly a decade of coverage, which marks this as an emerging or niche claim space rather than a mature battleground. Publication lags filing by around 18 months, so the apparent drop-off in the most recent years understates real filing activity somewhat, but the shape of the trend — a sharp 2018 peak followed by a long, thin tail — is unlikely to be an artefact of that lag alone.
Most records are filed as extensions of battery and energy-storage claims rather than as standalone capacitor technology, and receiving offices are scattered across Europe, Australia, India, Canada and a few individual jurisdictions rather than concentrated in one filing hub. That spread, combined with the low volume, points to a field still being staked out rather than one with settled claim boundaries.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 13-family dataset: how filing activity has moved over time, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend: a 2018 spike, then a fade
Filings were at zero in 2017, jumped to a peak of 10 in 2018, and have since fallen back toward zero — the 2022 midpoint sits at just 1 filing. This is a flat-to-declining trend overall, not a steadily growing one, though the most recent one to two years are understated by publication lag.
IPC composition: batteries, not pure capacitors
H01M (batteries, cells & fuel cells) accounts for 12 of the records, far ahead of H01G (capacitors) at 4 and H01L (semiconductor devices) at 1. Claims in this space are being written primarily as hybrid or battery-adjacent energy-storage architecture, with on-chip semiconductor integration a distinctly minority claim type.
Shares are the percentage of the 13 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Solid-State Supercapacitor System Integration with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about solid-state supercapacitor system integration and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited and most representative filings
On-chip plasmonic energy harvester, microsupercapacitor and sensor (SC Nanom MEMS)
The disclosure describes an on-chip integrated self-powered nano/microsystem combining a plasmonic interdigitated metal-semiconductor-metal Schottky thin-film solar cell as energy harvester, an in-plane interdigitated supercapacitor as power source, and a sensor with interdigitated electrodes — either a plasmonic photodetector or an ultralow-power chemiresistive gas sensor. The harvester, supercapacitor and sensor share the same chalcogenide semiconductor material, such as Sb2S3.Filed by SC Nanom MEMS SRL, published 2024-01-03.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20180366280A1 | Electrodes and electrolytes for aqueous electrochemical energy storage systems | 46 |
Citation counts favour older records in a searched corpus and should be read as a signal of influence, not current relevance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (1 of 1 rows); 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 say about this field
Three signals stand out once the ranking and trend data are read together: a small absolute base, a lopsided IPC split, and citation weight sitting on a single older record.
A field still being staked out
With only 13 patent families across the full coverage window, no single filer has built a defensible thicket. The scattered receiving offices — Europe, Australia, India, Canada, Germany, Norway — suggest applicants are testing individual jurisdictions rather than pursuing coordinated global protection.
A spike that did not repeat
The 2018 peak of 10 filings was not sustained; by the 2022 midpoint filing had dropped to a single record. Whether this reflects a technology dead-end, a shift to filing under different search terms, or genuine white space is not answerable from filing counts alone.
Claimed as batteries more than capacitors
Three times as many records sit in the battery/cell IPC subclass as in the dedicated capacitor subclass. Anyone drafting new claims here should check both classes; a filing that reads as a supercapacitor may already be classified — and searchable — as a battery-adjacent device.
Influence concentrated in one older filing
The most-cited record in the corpus, on aqueous electrochemical energy storage electrodes and electrolytes, carries markedly more citations than anything else in the set. That weight reflects its age and breadth rather than current commercial dominance.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to solid-state supercapacitor system integration, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and how thin the field is
Only one meaningfully strong co-assignee pairing appears in the dataset; beyond it, filing is fragmented across single entrants with no recent-year momentum recorded for any tracked assignee.
A university-industry pair leads by volume
The strongest co-assignee relationship in the dataset links a university board and a nanotechnology energy company across 10 shared records, far ahead of the next pairing at 1. This looks like a sustained joint research programme rather than incidental co-filing.
No active filer in the most recent year
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, including the leading pairing and Tyndall/SC Nanom MEMS, shows zero filings in the latest year. Given publication lag, this does not confirm the field has gone cold, but it does mean no current filer can be pointed to as actively building position right now.
Fragmented beyond the top pairing
Outside the one strong pairing, the corpus shows only one other identified co-assignee relationship, at a single shared record. The bulk of the 13 families appear to be filed independently, which is consistent with a technology area that has not yet consolidated around a small set of dominant players.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | — |
| Nanotech Energy, Inc. | 0 | — |
| TYNDALL NAT INST | 0 | — |
| SC NANOM MEMS SRL | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The filing counts here raise questions that a narrow patent search cannot answer on its own — particularly around whether the 2018 peak reflects a genuine technology cycle or a shift in how later filings were drafted and classified.
Check adjacent search terms
A field this small is sensitive to search-string choice. Broadening or varying the terms around 'integration' may surface related filings classified without those exact phrases.
Explore search strategies in Eureka →Track the leading co-filing pair
The university-industry pairing responsible for 10 shared records is the closest thing this dataset has to an established programme; watching its continuation filings is the most direct way to gauge whether the field is reactivating.
Monitor assignee activity in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The dataset behind this page identifies 13 published patent families between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine solid-state supercapacitor technology with on-chip, flexible-device, or energy-system integration claims. This is a small, niche corpus rather than a crowded one. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true count for the most recent one to two years is likely somewhat higher than currently visible.
Filings rose to a peak of 10 in 2018 and fell back to near zero by the early 2020s, with only 1 filing recorded at the 2022 midpoint. The dataset does not indicate a specific cause; it could reflect a genuine slowdown in this exact claim combination, a shift toward different search terms or IPC classifications, or simply the small sample size making year-to-year swings look more dramatic than they are. Anyone relying on this trend for a go/no-go decision should corroborate it with a broader search of adjacent terminology.
Predominantly as a battery-adjacent technology: 12 of the 13 records fall under IPC subclass H01M (batteries, cells & fuel cells), compared with 4 under H01G (capacitors) and 1 under H01L (semiconductor devices). Note that these figures can overlap, since a single record may carry multiple IPC codes. Practically, this means a freedom-to-operate search focused only on capacitor classifications would miss most of the relevant prior art in this space.
The dataset shows one clearly dominant co-assignee relationship, a pairing between a university board and a nanotechnology energy company that together account for 10 shared records, far more than any other pairing identified. A second, much smaller pairing links Tyndall National Institute and SC Nanom MEMS on a single shared record. Beyond these two pairings, filing activity is fragmented across independent entrants, and none of the tracked assignees show any filings in the most recent year.
Given the strong skew toward battery-class IPC codes and the low overall volume, sub-areas that stay closer to pure capacitor architecture and integration mechanics look comparatively under-claimed, including on-chip pairings of energy harvesters with microsupercapacitors, flexible-device solid electrolyte integration, and shared chalcogenide-material designs across harvesting and storage components. These are inferences from claim density, not a guarantee of novelty, so any filing strategy built on them should be checked against a fuller prior-art search before drafting.
Research Solid-State Supercapacitor System Integration in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole solid-state supercapacitor system integration 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.