https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/cloud-nested-virtualization-hypervisor-resource-isolation-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-20 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Patent Landscape Snapshot

Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patents

A 4-family, 11-record dataset on cloud nested virtualization isolation, with IBM named on half the families.

11
Published Records
4
Simple Patent Families
36%
In Force at Cut-off
US
Leading Jurisdiction

11 published records collapse into 4 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. In force = 4 of 11 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.

  • Only 4 simple patent families and 11 published records match this search string across all years. With no date limit applied to the query.
  • International Business Machine Corporation is named on 2 of the 4 families, the highest share of any listed filer. At 50.0% of the families in scope.
  • Every family in scope carries the IPC subclass G06F, Electric digital data processing. At 100.0% of the 4 simple patent families.
Check your own idea
Published byPatsnap Research··5 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this dataset covers

This page is built from a single search string — TAC:(cloud AND "nested virtualization" AND (hypervisor OR "virtual machine monitor" OR isolation)), run with no date restriction. It returns 4 simple patent families and 11 published records, a count small enough that every figure below should be read as a description of this search result, not of a field.

With only 4 families in scope, this is a starting point for a manual search, not a map of the technology. Small counts like this are as likely to reflect gaps in the search terms as gaps in actual filing activity, so no conclusion about concentration, white space or trend should be drawn from it alone.

Records and families in scope
  1. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINE CORPORATION2
  2. ADVENTIUM ENTERPRISES LLC1
  3. AMAZON TECH INC1

Ordered by volume only, not by importance or claim strength. Counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families, so one invention filed in several countries counts once. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field as recorded on each document; subsidiaries and group companies are not merged. The icon before each name is read from the name itself (words such as University, Institute or Ltd); the data carries no organisation-type field, so treat it as a reading aid rather than a classification. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified; that identification is not exhaustive, so an individually held filing can still appear below. Either way those filings stay inside the totals above. This table shows the top 3 of the 3 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 3 is not the complete set of filers. A single family can name more than one filer, so these counts overlap and do not add up to the total.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from one Patsnap search for Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-20. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers

Filing trend and technology composition

The figures below are drawn directly from the search result: a filing-trend chart counted in published records, and an IPC breakdown counted in simple patent families.

Filing trend by earliest filing year (published records)

Records run from 2011, with a peak so far of 5 records in 2012. The chart shades 2022 onward because records filed in those years are still publishing; this dataset is too thin to read any further trend, growth rate or slowdown into the shape of the line.

Filing trend by earliest filing year (published records)01345220115201320152017201920212023202502022 onwards are shaded as still filling in: a filing is only visible once it publishes, up to 30 months after filing.

Counted in published records by earliest filing year, not de-duplicated into families. A filing is counted in the year it was filed, but it only becomes visible after it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. 2022 onwards are therefore still filling in and are shaded; no growth figure on this page uses them. Because this series counts documents rather than inventions, a rise can mean more inventions or the same inventions filed in more countries; this dataset cannot separate the two.

IPC subclass composition (simple patent families)

G06F, Electric digital data processing, appears on all 4 simple patent families in scope (100.0%). Other subclasses the chart displays sit well below this and are not broken out in the prose because the dataset cannot distinguish a genuine minor branch from search-string noise at this size.

IPC subclass composition (simple patent families)G06F · Electric digital data processi…4100.0%

Shares are the percentage of the 4 patent families in scope. One patent family can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from one Patsnap search for Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-20. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cloud nested virtualization hypervisor resource isolation patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Featured Record

A record from the result set

First record returned
US9292316B22016-03-22

Cloud of virtual clouds for increasing isolation among execution domains

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION

The abstract describes selecting a machine as a management node running a hypervisor with nested virtualization capability, deploying cloud managers on management nodes, selecting host nodes running level-two hypervisors, and forming virtual clouds that each pair a cloud manager with a level-two hypervisor.This is the first record returned by the search under the database's default order, not a ranking by citation, novelty or scope. What its granted claims actually require has to be read from the claim set itself; an abstract and a family count cannot establish that.

US9292316B2, patent drawing 1US9292316B2, patent drawing 2
View record detail

Selected as the first record the search returns under the database default order, then shown in full. It is not ranked by citations, claim breadth or commercial importance, and it is not a judgement about which filing in this space matters most.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. The first record the search returned, shown in full. Derived from one Patsnap search for Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-20. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis


  
Where to run it
Fastest

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 →
For builders

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 →
Key Figures

Reading the dataset

Three figures from the search result, reported without ranking or interpretation beyond what the numbers themselves state.

Dataset size
4 families / 11 records
simple patent families / published records

Scope of the search result

The search string returns 4 simple patent families, de-duplicated across countries, and 11 published records in total, with no date limit applied. These two counts use different units and are not interchangeable.

Retrieved 2026-10-20
Largest listed filer
50.0%
of 4 simple patent families

International Business Machine Corporation

International Business Machine Corporation is named on 2 of the 4 simple patent families in scope (50.0%). The filer list contains organisations only and 3 entities are listed; this single-row figure is not added to any other row.

Share stated for this one row only
Long tail
3 of 3
listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each

Spread across the listed filers

All 3 of the 3 listed filers hold 2 or fewer simple patent families each. This count describes how thinly held the filings are among the listed rows; filer rows overlap and cannot be summed into a coverage or concentration percentage.

Organisations only; individual-named filers are excluded from this list but counted in the totals
Receiving offices
US 10 / India 1
published records by filing office

Where applications were filed

The search returned 2 receiving offices across the 11 published records: United States with 10 and India with 1. This describes where the applications were filed, not where any filer is based.

Counted in published records, which sum to the record total
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cloud nested virtualization hypervisor resource isolation patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-20. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Next Steps

Taking this further

This page reports what one search string returns. Refining the query or pulling full claim sets requires a dedicated workspace.

Rerun the query with broader terms

A 4-family result this small may reflect the search string missing adjacent phrasing as much as it reflects actual filing activity. Widening the terms inside Patsnap Eureka can surface related families this exact string does not catch.

Open Eureka

Pull granted claims before drawing conclusions

Abstracts and family counts cannot establish claim scope. Reading the granted claim set of US9292316B2 and the other records directly is the only way to assess what any one filing covers.

Explore the full record set
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Suggested next steps. No new data: every figure named here is one of those above. Derived from one Patsnap search for Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-20. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-20. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Cloud Nested Virtualization Hypervisor Resource Isolation Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole cloud nested virtualization hypervisor resource isolation patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka
How this page was built, and what the numbers do and do not mean

Search. Every figure on this page comes from one Patsnap search, run once and not edited afterwards. This is the exact search string:

TAC:(cloud AND "nested virtualization" AND (hypervisor OR "virtual machine monitor" OR isolation))

Reading the field codes: TAC searches the title, abstract and claims of each record, not the full description. The search string sets no date limit, so the scope is every matching record in the database regardless of when it was filed. It is not restricted to recent years. How this string was built matters for how far the counts can be pushed. It was generated in batch from a topic list rather than hand-crafted for this page, and the result set is not manually screened. A keyword search over title, abstract and claims both over-captures (unrelated filings that happen to use the same words) and under-captures (the same invention written in different words). This page cannot measure either effect, so read every figure here as what this particular string returned, not as what exists in the field. One subclass (G06F) carries 100.0% of the patent families, so this search returned a classification-tight set.

What is being counted. Two different units appear on this page and they are not interchangeable. The filer list and the technology split are counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families: one invention counts once however many countries it was filed in. The total, the jurisdiction split and the filing-year chart are counted in published records: the same invention counts once per publication. For this search that is 11 records and 4 families. Record counts reward filing in many jurisdictions; family counts do not. Shares are only ever taken against a denominator in the same unit, and each one names it.

Who the filers are. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field, as recorded on the documents themselves. They are not rolled up to corporate group: a parent and its subsidiaries appear as separate entries, and a portfolio acquired from another company stays under the name on the document unless the assignment is reflected there. This list is meant to carry organisations, not people. Filings held by a named individual are identified by matching the assignee against the inventors on the same search, and, for names written in Chinese, Japanese or Korean characters, by the name carrying no organisational suffix; those are removed from the list. Neither test is exhaustive: the inventor list it matches against is itself capped, and a personal name written in Latin script with no organisational wording in it cannot be told apart from a short company name by rule. So an individually held filing can still appear in the list. Those filings stay inside every total and share on this page either way, so the listed entries can add up to less than the total. A record shown in full further down still names its assignee exactly as the patent office records it, including where that is a person: that name is how the record is identified and checked. What is left out of the ranking is people as ranked entries, not people as cited sources. The table shows the top 3 of the 3 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 3 is not every filer. One patent family can name several filers and each is counted separately, so these rows are not slices of a divided whole: adding them together over-counts, and this page deliberately publishes no combined "top five" share for that reason. See every filer, individuals included

Dates. The year chart counts by earliest filing year, not publication year. A filing only becomes visible once it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. Measured across these pages, the year four back from today still holds only about 89% of its eventual count. 2022 onwards are therefore shaded on the chart as still filling in. The data behind this page was retrieved on 2026-10-20.

Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (4 of 11). Everything else is pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or not determinable, and those states are not broken out here because the underlying codes do not separate them cleanly. Legal status changes continuously and is reported per document, not per family. Get the status breakdown in Eureka

Classification. The technology split uses IPC subclasses (four characters, for example H01M). A single record usually carries several, so the shares add up to more than 100% and a record can appear in more than one bar. Subclass is a coarse grouping; it describes the field a record was classified into, not what the claims cover. Break the classes down to subgroup level

Who wrote the words. The tables, charts, counts, shares and patent numbers on this page are produced directly from the search result by a program; none of them are written or estimated by a language model. The surrounding prose, headings, FAQ answers and the answers in the question panel are drafted by a language model that is given those same figures and is not permitted to introduce others. Prose can still mis-describe a correct figure, so where the two disagree, the tables and charts are the record.

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 limitations that apply to every figure above. Recent filings are under-counted, because an application is not public until roughly 18 months after filing and database loading adds further delay. The search string defines and constrains everything shown: records that use different terminology, or that sit outside the fields searched, are absent and cannot be counted. Applicant names, classification codes, legal-status codes and citation records are taken as recorded and may contain errors, duplicates, omissions or stale entries. Ordering by volume is not a measure of quality, scope, enforceability or commercial value, and a larger portfolio is not a stronger one. 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, validity or infringement search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. No attorney-client relationship is created by it. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently against the primary records 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.

The question panel. The answers behind the suggested questions on this page were written when the page was generated, not in response to your click. The progress steps that play before an answer appears are an animation of how that analysis was done; nothing is being searched or computed at that moment. Typing your own question instead opens Patsnap Eureka, which does run it live.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.