XPS & Surface Analysis Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Flat filing activity since 2022. the peak year (8 filings) has not been exceeded, and 2026 shows zero so far — this is a mature, narrow field rather than a growth one.
- Filing sits almost entirely inside one IPC subclass. 38 of 41 records sit in G01N material analysis and testing, with H01J, G01J and G01Q trailing far behind.
- Co-filing is rare. only two co-assignee pairs appear across the whole dataset, meaning most work here is filed by a single owner rather than joint development.
A narrow, instrument-centric field with a settled core
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and surface chemical analysis patents cluster tightly around instrumentation and method claims for identifying chemical state, depth profiling and charge compensation on solid surfaces. The dataset covers 41 patent families filed between 2015 and the 2026 cut-off, concentrated overwhelmingly in G01N material analysis and testing, with smaller contributions from electron-tube hardware (H01J), radiation measurement (G01J) and scanning-probe techniques (G01Q). This is a field defined by a handful of instrument makers and a long tail of single-filing academic and specialist applicants.
Filing activity peaked in 2022 at 8 records and has not grown since; the most recent year is always undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, but the flat trajectory across the preceding several years points to a technology whose core claim space is already occupied rather than one in an active build-out phase.
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 41 families: how filing has moved year over year, and where those filings sit across the IPC classification system.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran at 7 in 2017 and reached a peak of 8 in 2022; the midpoint year matches the peak, indicating flat rather than accelerating activity, with 2026 filings still incomplete due to publication lag.
IPC subclass composition
G01N accounts for 38 of 41 records, making it the dominant classification by a wide margin; H01J (7), G01J (6) and G01Q (5) appear as secondary, overlapping classifications rather than distinct competing clusters, and single-digit counts in B32B, B82Y, C01B and C01F mark peripheral material-specific applications.
Shares are the percentage of the 41 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy and Surface Analysis with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and surface analysis and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited records
Screening/analysis of fluorocarbons using x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy
Methods of determining the presence or absence of fluorocarbon(s) on a substrate using X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS). A method may be used to determine the presence or absence of per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), may use a porous polymer substrate, and may use solid-phase extraction (SPE) to test aqueous samples including groundwater, wastewater, potable water, drinking water, or surface water. The limit of detection of fluorine in a method may be 0.05% F or less for XPS analysis and/or 20 ng or less on a substrate.Filed by The Penn State Research Foundation, published 2022-11-24.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5472881A | Thiol labeling of DNA for attachment to gold surfaces | 741 |
| 2 | US20190285548A1 | XPS and raman sample analysis system and method | 17 |
| 3 | US4737639A | Energy and analysis detection system for surface chemical analysis | 13 |
| 4 | US7875857B2 | X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy analysis system for surface analysis and method therefor | 11 |
| 5 | US10816476B2 | XPS and Raman sample analysis system and method | 9 |
| 6 | US20160327499A1 | Hard X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy Apparatus | 9 |
| 7 | US20150338439A1 | Systems and Methods for Non-Destructive Surface Chemical Analysis of Samples | 9 |
| 8 | CN112763527A | 一种直接获得材料界面氧势和结构的方法 | 7 |
| 9 | CN113218983A | 一种标定薄膜材料XPS深度剖析刻蚀速率的方法 | 5 |
| 10 | GB2538125A | Hard x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy apparatus | 5 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply by virtue of longer exposure; treat this table as a map of foundational instrumentation, not of current filing activity.
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 filing strategy
The dataset is small and concentrated, which changes how a new filer should read it: the risk is less about racing competitors and more about navigating a settled core.
Activity has plateaued, not accelerated
Filings rose to 8 in 2022 and have not exceeded that level since; the midpoint of the trend equals the peak, which is a flat signature rather than a growth curve. A new entrant should not expect to out-file an active wave — there isn't one.
Claim space is concentrated in one subclass
Nearly all records sit inside G01N, with H01J, G01J and G01Q contributing smaller, overlapping counts. High density in G01N signals that core method and apparatus claims are already staked out, not that the underlying technology is exhausted.
Most filings are single-owner
Only two co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, one instrument-maker pairing and one individual pairing. That scarcity suggests most XPS instrumentation IP is developed and filed in-house rather than through joint ventures or shared R&D agreements.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and surface analysis, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Thermo Fisher Scientific (Instruments) LLC | VG Systems Ltd. | 7 |
| KOBAYASHI KEISUKE | KOBAYASHI YOSHIKO | 3 |
With only two identified co-assignee pairs in the dataset, partnership-based filing is not the norm in this field — most protection here is built and held by a single applicant.
Who holds the claim space
Recent-year momentum across the tracked assignees is flat: every one of the leading names shows zero filings in the latest year, consistent with the plateaued trend seen across the whole dataset.
Instrument makers hold the historical core
Assignees tied to XPS hardware and detection systems anchor the most-cited records in this corpus, reflecting foundational apparatus claims filed well before the recent plateau. None of the tracked leading assignees show filings in the most recent year.
Applied-method claims come from research institutions
Method-specific applications, such as fluorocarbon screening via XPS, are filed by university research foundations rather than instrument OEMs, targeting a specific analytical use case rather than the underlying hardware.
A long tail of small, independent filers
Beyond the instrument-maker cluster, individual co-inventors account for some of the only repeated collaboration in the dataset, filing a small number of related records together rather than through a corporate assignee.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Thermo Fisher Scientific (Instruments) LLC | 0 | — |
| VG Systems Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. | 0 | — |
| PHOTOELECTRON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY HLDG LLC | 0 | — |
| KOBAYASHI KEISUKE | 0 | — |
| KOBAYASHI YOSHIKO | 0 | — |
| The Penn State Research Foundation | 0 | — |
| CUMPSON PETER J | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a settled core with specific thin branches; the next step is testing a concrete claim against that core rather than reading trend lines further.
Check freedom-to-operate around depth profiling and charge compensation
These two method areas anchor the search string itself and sit inside the dense G01N cluster — any new filing here needs a claim chart against the most-cited records, not just a trend read.
Explore FTO workflows in EurekaMap the combined XPS-Raman sub-branch
Multiple records reference combined XPS and Raman sample analysis systems; this pairing appears repeatedly but thinly, making it a candidate for a narrowly scoped, defensible claim.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaCommon questions about XPS and surface analysis patents
This dataset identifies 41 patent families filed between 2015 and the 2026 cut-off, using a search combining XPS, surface chemical analysis and quantification/depth-profiling terms restricted to relevant IPC classes. That is a small, specialist corpus compared to broader analytical-instrumentation fields, reflecting how narrow the core technology area is. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true count for the most recent one to two years will be higher once those applications publish.
The most-cited records in this corpus trace back to instrument-focused assignees along with foundational filings dating back decades, such as the widely cited surface-analysis detection system patents. Recent-year momentum data shows the tracked leading assignees, including instrument makers and individual inventors, all recorded zero filings in the latest tracked year. That flat recent momentum suggests the current leadership position was established earlier rather than through recent competitive filing.
Filing activity is flat rather than growing: it started at 7 records in 2017, peaked at 8 in 2022, and the midpoint of the tracked period matches that peak rather than trending upward. This is characteristic of a technology where the core method and apparatus claims are already staked out and new filers are working around the edges rather than building a new claim base. Readers should treat the apparent drop toward 2026 with caution, since recent years are always undercounted due to publication lag.
Relative to the dense G01N core, sub-areas such as automated charge-compensation calibration, depth-profiling data quantification software, combined XPS-Raman sample handling, and spatial-resolution micro-area imaging show thinner representation in this dataset. These are not confirmed white space until a dedicated freedom-to-operate search is run, but their low document counts relative to the core cluster make them reasonable starting points for scoping a new claim. Fluoropolymer and PFAS-specific surface screening methods, exemplified by the Penn State Research Foundation filing, also appear thinly represented beyond that single record.
US20220373486A1 covers methods of detecting per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) on a substrate using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, including use of a porous polymer substrate and solid-phase extraction for aqueous samples such as groundwater or drinking water. It specifies detection limits down to 0.05% fluorine or 20 ng on a substrate. Anyone building an XPS-based PFAS or fluorocarbon screening method for water samples should review this filing's claim scope before finalising a detection workflow, since it targets a specific applied-method niche rather than general XPS hardware.
Research X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy and Surface Analysis in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and surface analysis 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.