Ga2O3 & AlN Semiconductor Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Filing has cooled sharply. activity peaked at 7 records in 2018 and had fallen to zero by the 2022 midpoint, with the most recent year still partial in the data.
- Three assignees account for the entire ranked field. the top 3 and top 5 combined both equal 100.0% of the 19 records in scope – there is no long tail here, only a short one.
- Crystal growth and coating claims sit underneath most filings. C30B crystal-growth classifications touch 36.8% of records and C23C coating/deposition classifications touch 42.1%, meaning substrate quality, not device topology, is where most of the technical argument lives.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 19 published records at the intersection of gallium oxide (Ga2O3) and aluminum nitride (AlN) semiconductor claims, filtered to documents that address breakdown field, thermal conductivity limitation, p-type doping challenge, substrate growth or device demonstration, and classified under H01L29, C30B29 or H01L21. The scope is narrow by design: it isolates the substrate-and-device engineering problem set that separates ultra-wide bandgap materials from mainstream silicon carbide and gallium nitride filings, rather than capturing every mention of either material.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off. Because publication typically lags filing by roughly eighteen months, the tail end of the trend – including the 2026 figure – understates real filing activity rather than reflecting an actual drop-off in interest.
Filing trend and technology mix
Two views of the same 19 records: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the technical weight.
A peak in 2018, then a decline to zero
Filings rose to a peak of 7 records in 2018 from 4 in 2017, then fell away; by the 2022 midpoint the annual count had dropped to zero and it has not recovered since, though the final year in the window is still partial.
Semiconductor devices dominate, crystal growth underpins them
Every record in scope carries an H01L semiconductor-device classification, and 68.4% also carry an H10P classification. Below that device layer, 42.1% of records touch C23C coating and surface deposition and 36.8% touch C30B crystal growth – the two classes most closely tied to substrate quality rather than device architecture.
Shares are the percentage of the 19 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Ultra-Wide Bandgap Semiconductors (Ga2O3 and AlN) with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about ultra-wide bandgap semiconductors (ga2o3 and aln) and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this field
Gallium oxide semiconductor structure, vertical gallium oxide-based power device, and preparation method (US20230127051A1)
The filing describes bonding and thinning an unintentionally doped gallium oxide layer onto a highly doped, highly thermally conductive heterogeneous substrate, then forming a heavily doped gallium oxide layer on top through ion implantation – a layered structure built specifically to route heat away from the active gallium oxide region while keeping the vertical device architecture intact.Filed by Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, published 2023-04-27.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20200020778A1 | Compound semiconductor substrate | 8 |
| 2 | US20180277363A1 | COMPOUND SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE WITH SiC LAYER | 7 |
| 3 | US20230127051A1 | Gallium oxide semiconductor structure, vertical gallium oxide-based power device, and preparation method | 5 |
| 4 | US20190279864A1 | Method for manufacturing a compound semiconductor substrate, and a compound semiconductor substrate | 3 |
| 5 | US20200402922A1 | Compound semiconductor substrate | 2 |
| 6 | US11316018B2 | Compound semiconductor substrate including electron transition layer and barrier layer | 2 |
| 7 | EP3605595A1 | Compound semiconductor substrate | 2 |
| 8 | EP3366807A1 | Compound semiconductor substrate provided with sic layer | 2 |
| 9 | US11476115B2 | Compound semiconductor substrate comprising a SiC layer | 1 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older records that have had more time to accumulate citations – read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a measure of current technical importance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (9 of 9 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 data means for R&D and IP planning
Three read-outs from the filing pattern that matter more than the raw counts.
A short field, not a long tail
The top 3 and top 5 combined both cover all 19 records in scope – there is no fringe of single-filing entrants to track here. Anyone entering this space is negotiating around a small, identifiable set of holders rather than a crowded field.
Filing has gone quiet
Activity peaked in 2018 and had fallen to zero at the 2022 midpoint of the coverage window. Combined with the publication lag, this pattern is consistent with either a maturing claim set that no longer needs fresh filings, or an area waiting on the next technical breakthrough before assignees file again.
Substrate quality is the real battleground
Device-level H01L classifications sit on every record, but the coating/deposition and crystal-growth classes underneath them – present on well over a third of filings each – show that the harder technical argument is usually about how the material is grown and finished, not how the device is laid out.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to ultra-wide bandgap semiconductors (ga2o3 and aln), with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ranked field
Only three assignees appear in the ranking, and together they account for every record in scope – a rare case where the entire competitive picture fits on one screen.
One assignee dominates the count
The leading assignee holds 16 of the 19 records in this landscape, making it the reference point for any freedom-to-operate check in this space. Its filings anchor the substrate and device claims that the rest of the field has to work around.
No one is filing fresh right now
All three ranked assignees show zero filings in the latest year of the window. Given the publication lag, this is not proof the technology has stalled, but it does mean no assignee is currently pulling ahead with new claims.
Filing is split between two offices
Receiving-office activity is close to even between the United States and the European Patent Office, suggesting assignees are pursuing parallel protection in both jurisdictions rather than concentrating on a single home market.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| IWATT Inc. | 0 | — |
| Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences | 0 | — |
| POWER CUBESEMI INC | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape narrows the field to three assignees and a small set of technical branches – the next step is deciding where your own claims would actually sit.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader
With one assignee holding 16 of 19 records, any new filing in substrate bonding or vertical device structure should start with a claim chart against that holder's portfolio.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
Thermal-conductive substrate integration and p-type doping activation show thinner coverage than the core device classes – worth a closer novelty search before committing R&D resources.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions about ultra-wide bandgap semiconductor patents
The data shows filings peaked at 7 records in 2018 and fell to zero by the 2022 midpoint of the coverage window. This pattern can reflect several things at once: an early wave of foundational substrate and device claims being staked out, followed by consolidation once the leading assignee's portfolio was established. It can also partly reflect publication lag, since filings from the last eighteen months or so are typically not yet published and so the most recent years in any dataset understate real activity. Readers should treat the apparent decline as a floor, not a confirmed end point.
Only three assignees appear in the ranked field for this dataset, and together they account for all 19 records in scope. One assignee holds the clear majority at 16 records, meaning most of the technical ground – particularly substrate structure and vertical device architecture – is staked out by a single holder rather than spread across many competitors. This is a smaller, more concentrated field than most semiconductor sub-areas, so due diligence work can focus tightly on that leader's claim set.
Based on the IPC composition, semiconductor device claims under H01L appear in every record, but a large share also touch crystal growth (C30B, 36.8% of records) and coating and surface deposition (C23C, 42.1% of records). This indicates that much of the inventive work documented in this landscape concerns how the substrate material is grown, bonded and finished, rather than how the finished device is laid out. Filings that address thermal management through substrate bonding, as in the representative record, sit at the intersection of both concerns.
The technology composition suggests thinner coverage in specific sub-areas relative to the dominant device and substrate classes: p-type doping activation schemes, heterogeneous substrate bonding interfaces, thermal-conductive backside layer integration, and ion-implantation profile control for heavily doped Ga2O3 layers. These are inferred from the relative density of the IPC classes rather than a direct count of filings in each niche, so they should be treated as starting points for a focused novelty search rather than confirmed gaps.
Not necessarily. All three ranked assignees show zero filings in the most recent year of this dataset, but publication typically lags filing by roughly eighteen months, so recent-year counts in any patent dataset are structurally understated. A flat or falling trend combined with high citation counts on older records, as seen here, is more consistent with a technology whose foundational claims are already filed and being cited by newer work than with one that has been abandoned.
Research Ultra-Wide Bandgap Semiconductors (Ga2O3 and AlN) in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole ultra-wide bandgap semiconductors (ga2o3 and aln) 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.