Wafer Dicing Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The top 5 assignees hold 223 of 349 records in scope (63.9%), and the top 10 hold 279 (79.9%) — a narrow group controls most of the claim space.
- Filing has cooled since 2019. Annual filings peaked at 25 in 2019 and had fallen to 11 by the 2022 midpoint, with the most recent year understated by publication lag.
- Claims cluster in one IPC subclass. 90.3% of the 349 records sit in H01L (semiconductor devices), leaving thinner, more open coverage in adhesives and layered-product classes.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent activity in wafer dicing and laser grooving equipment — the machines and processes that separate a finished wafer into individual dies without cracking them or damaging the low-k layers underneath. The search combines full-text terms for wafer dicing equipment, laser dicing and plasma dicing with claim-level language on chipping, kerf width, die strength, blade wear and stealth dicing, restricted to semiconductor device (H01L21), laser machining (B23K26) and cutting/severing (B28D5) classifications.
349 published records fall within scope between 2015 and the 2026-07-31 cut-off. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent year in the trend understates real filing activity and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 349-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings ran at 21 in 2017, rose to a peak of 25 in 2019, then eased to 11 by the 2022 midpoint and continued declining toward the 2026 cut-off, where the year is still partial and understated by publication lag.
IPC subclass composition
H01L (semiconductor devices) covers 90.3% of the 349 records, with H10P at 39.3% and B23K (welding, soldering and brazing — the laser and mechanical dicing hardware itself) at 29.2%. Adhesives (C09J, 13.8%) and layered products (B32B, 2.3%) carry far fewer filings, which is where claim space is least occupied. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 349 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Wafer Dicing and Laser Grooving Equipment with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about wafer dicing and laser grooving equipment and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
US20180233410A1 — Wafer dicing methods (pSemi Corporation, 2018-08-16)
Wafer dicing methods that simplify singulation for certain IC wafer substrates, aiming to improve device reliability and die strength, reduce cutting-kerf width, cut cost and improve yield. One method makes ablative scribing cuts on the wafer front side along cutting streets, followed by stealth laser dicing through the backside in alignment with those cuts. A second method applies stealth laser dicing through the backside alone, in alignment with the cutting streets around each die's perimeter.Abstract trimmed to source length; full claims should be reviewed before relying on scope.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | JP2002343747A | Dicing sheet and dicing method | 255 |
| 2 | US20120238073A1 | Method and Apparatus for Plasma Dicing a Semi-conductor Wafer | 121 |
| 3 | US20060068567A1 | Method for chip singulation | 107 |
| 4 | US20130065378A1 | Method and Apparatus for Plasma Dicing a Semi-conductor Wafer | 101 |
| 5 | JP2004111946A | Laser dicing equipment and dicing method | 95 |
| 6 | US20130230972A1 | Method and Apparatus for Plasma Dicing a Semi-conductor Wafer | 87 |
| 7 | JP2004079746A | Method of manufacturing chip | 73 |
| 8 | US20060105544A1 | Protective film agent for laser dicing and wafer processing method using the protective film agent | 69 |
| 9 | US7566634B2 | Method for chip singulation | 65 |
| 10 | US9165832B1 | Method of die singulation using laser ablation and induction of internal defects with a laser | 64 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favor older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
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 patterns in this dataset matter more than any single ranking: where the field has consolidated, where filing energy has gone, and where the record base is thin.
A small group controls most of the claim space
The top 5 assignees combine for 223 of the 349 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 279, or 79.9%. A new entrant filing broad plasma- or stealth-dicing claims is filing directly into ground already covered by a handful of established players.
Filing activity has cooled, not accelerated
Annual filings peaked at 25 in 2019 and had fallen to 11 by 2022, with the recent-year trend continuing downward toward the 2026 cut-off. Several leading assignees show no filings in the latest recorded year, though publication lag means this understates true recent activity.
Dicing hardware claims sit inside device classification
H01L (semiconductor devices) covers the large majority of records at 90.3% of the 349 in scope, with B23K — the laser and mechanical machining hardware class — at 29.2%. Adhesives and layered-product classes are far thinner, at 13.8% and 2.3% respectively.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to wafer dicing and laser grooving equipment, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders in this dataset span plasma dicing specialists, laser equipment makers and device manufacturers integrating dicing into their own process flows. Co-assignee links are sparse — only 10 pairs recorded — meaning most filings come from a single organisation rather than joint development.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 106 records, more than the combined fifth- and tenth-place holders (17 and 10 respectively). That gap suggests a filer with a long-running, deliberate program rather than opportunistic single filings.
The mid-field thins quickly
Filing counts fall from 17 records at fifth place to 10 at tenth, a steeper drop than the gap between first and fifth. Below the top tier, most of the 53 ranked assignees hold only a handful of records each.
Filing is mostly solo, not joint
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest pair links an assignee with a single named inventor rather than a second corporate partner. Joint filing is not a meaningful route into this space based on current records.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Plasma-Therm LLC | 0 | — |
| Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Tokyo Seimitsu Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| NXP B.V. | 0 | — |
| Electro Scientific Industries, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Nitto Denko Corporation | 0 | — |
| Infineon Technologies AG | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to a mature, concentrated field with a cooling filing rate — the open questions are about where the remaining room to file actually is.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 5
With 63.9% of records held by five assignees, any new filing in plasma or stealth dicing should be checked claim-by-claim against their portfolios before drafting.
Run an FTO check in Eureka →Probe the thin IPC branches
Adhesive (C09J) and layered-product (B32B) classes carry a fraction of the record volume that H01L does — worth a deeper claim-scope read to confirm the gap is real.
Explore white space in Eureka →Track the leader's recent activity
Several top assignees show zero filings in the latest recorded year; confirm whether that reflects a real pause or publication lag before drawing conclusions.
Monitor assignee activity in Eureka →Common questions on wafer dicing patents
This dataset of 349 records shows a concentrated field: the top 5 assignees together hold 223 records, 63.9% of everything in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 279, or 79.9%. The leading assignee alone holds 106 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 17. Anyone assessing this space should treat the top tier as the primary prior-art risk rather than spreading attention evenly across the 53 ranked companies.
No — filings peaked at 25 in 2019 and had fallen to 11 by the 2022 midpoint, with the trend continuing downward toward the 2026 data cut-off. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent year or two will always look thinner than it eventually turns out to be, but the multi-year decline from the 2019 peak is a real pattern, not just a lag artifact. Several of the most active historical filers show no recorded filings in the latest year.
Both terms appear directly in the search scope for this dataset, and they represent distinct technical routes: plasma dicing separates dies through a chemical etch process, while stealth dicing uses a laser to create an internal modification layer that the wafer is later cleaved along. The most-cited records in this dataset include filings specifically titled around plasma dicing apparatus for semiconductor wafers, indicating that route has drawn sustained citation activity. A representative record, US20180233410A1, combines ablative laser scribing with backside stealth dicing in a single method, illustrating how the two approaches are increasingly claimed together rather than as separate alternatives.
The IPC composition shows heavy concentration in H01L (90.3% of the 349 records) and moderate coverage in B23K, the laser and mechanical machining class, at 29.2%. Adhesive-related claims (C09J) sit at only 13.8% and layered-product claims (B32B) at just 2.3%, both well below the dominant device classification. Those thinner classes — kerf-sealing adhesives, dicing tape stack construction, blade-wear monitoring, and post-dicing die-strength testing — are worth a closer freedom-to-operate look before assuming the space is fully occupied.
Citation counts in this dataset range up to 255 for the most-cited record, but citation counts inside any searched patent corpus systematically favor older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate references. A 2002 or 2004 filing with a high citation count reflects historical influence on the field's foundational methods, not necessarily current commercial relevance. Use citation rank as one signal among several — combine it with recency, assignee filing pattern, and IPC classification before deciding a given patent is strategically important today.
Research Wafer Dicing and Laser Grooving Equipment in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole wafer dicing and laser grooving equipment 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.