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 →https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/split-gate-flash-memory-cell-structure-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-20 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Semiconductors & MicroelectronicsSplit Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure Patents: Who Files and How Much
772 families and 1,974 records on split-gate flash memory cells, with filer concentration and a filing trend through 2026.
1,974
Published Records
772
Simple Patent Families
24%
Families Naming the Largest Filer
36%
In Force at Cut-off
1,974 published records collapse into 772 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING CO LTD is named on 182 of the 772 patent families in scope. One patent family can name several filers, so these figures are not slices of a divided whole and do not add up. In force = 720 of 1,974 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.
- 772 simple patent families and 1,974 published records make up this search, with no date limit applied to the query.
- Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd is named on 182 of the 772 families (23.6%), the highest single-row share in the listed filers.
- 52 of the 87 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each while the filing trend peaked in 2019 at 193 published records before 2022 onward data starts filling in.
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this search covers
This landscape draws on a search for split gate or split-gate flash memory structures across titles, abstracts and claims. It returns 772 simple patent families and 1,974 published records, with no date limit set on the query, so the set spans whatever filing years the matching records happen to carry. A simple family groups one invention across the countries it was filed in; a published record counts each individual publication, so the same invention filed in several jurisdictions produces several records against a single family.
Legal status at retrieval shows 720 of the 1,974 records (36%) as granted and currently in force. The remainder sit across pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or undetermined states that are not broken out individually in this dataset, so no single one of those categories can be sized from what is here.
Records vs. families in scope
Counted over all 1,974 published records, including filings from before 2007; the filing-trend chart below covers only the 1,038 records from 2007 onward, so the two charts are not the same set of documents. 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. 2 rows in this table start with the same name (SILICON STORAGE TECHNOLOGY INC, SILICON BASED TECH). They are left as separate rows, so the largest-filer figure above is per legal entity, not per group. Rows that look related still cannot be added together: one family can name several of them. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified (13 here); 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 30 of the 87 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 87 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 Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure 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
Data
Filing trend and technology split
The figures below are drawn directly from the search result set: a filing trend counted in published records by earliest filing year, and a technology composition counted in simple patent families.
Filing trend, 2007–2026 (1,038 of 1,974 published records)
Published records by earliest filing year rose from 23 in 2007 to a peak of 193 in 2019, then moved from 86 in 2018 to 60 in 2021, a -30% change over that span. 2022 onward is still filling in as later filings continue to publish, so those final years understate the eventual count and should not be read as a drop in filing activity.
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. This chart covers 2007-2026 (1,038 records); the 1,974 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
H01L (semiconductor devices) appears on 74.1% of the 772 families, H10B (memory device manufacture) on 50.9%, G11C (static & digital memories) on 28.8%, and H10D (semiconductor devices, general) on 15.7%. A family can carry more than one of these classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%; the dataset returned 20 subclasses in total, of which these four carry the largest shares.
Shares are the percentage of the 772 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 Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure 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 Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about split gate flash memory cell structure patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing
A record from the result set
From the result set
Semiconductor structure of split gate flash memory cell and method for manufacturing the same
SHANGHAI HUALI MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION
The abstract describes a split gate flash memory cell with a select gate and a floating gate formed on the substrate, an isolation wall on one side of the select gate with the floating gate on the other side, and an ion implantation region formed in the substrate below the isolation wall whose implant type differs from the substrate's own type. A manufacturing method for this structure is also described.This is the first record returned under the database's default ordering, not the most cited, newest or broadest filing in the set. It is shown to illustrate what one filing in this search looks like, not as representative of the field.
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 Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure 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
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 filer and technology data
These cards state figures drawn directly from the search result set, each counted in the unit noted.
Filer concentration
23.6%
share of 772 families
Largest single-row share among listed filers
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd is named on 182 of the 772 simple patent families in scope, a 23.6% share. This is a single-row figure; filer rows are not rolled up to corporate group and cannot be summed across rows to produce a combined share.
87 listed filers in total
Long tail
52 of 87
filers with 2 or fewer families
Most listed filers hold a small number of families
52 of the 87 listed filers hold 2 or fewer simple patent families each. The remaining listed filers, including the one with the largest count, account for the rest of the spread across the 772 families in scope.
Organisations only; individual filers are excluded from this list but remain in the totals
Legal status
36%
of 1,974 records
Share granted and in force at retrieval
720 of the 1,974 published records (36%) were granted and in force at the 2026-10-20 retrieval date. The remaining 64% sit across pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed and undetermined states that are not individually broken out in this dataset.
Status is a snapshot at retrieval, not a success rate
Technology split
74.1%
of 772 families
H01L carries the highest IPC share
H01L (semiconductor devices) appears on 74.1% of the 772 families in scope, the highest share of any subclass in this dataset, followed by H10B at 50.9%. A family can carry more than one subclass, so these figures add up to more than 100% of families.
20 subclasses returned in 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 split gate flash memory cell structure patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure 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
Working with this dataset further
The figures above cover filers, technology split and filing trend at a dataset level. Narrower questions need a direct look at the records themselves.
Pull the granted claims
A family count or an abstract cannot establish what a granted claim covers. Reading the claim set directly is the only way to assess scope for any filing named on this page.
Open Patsnap EurekaTrack a specific filer's filings
The listed filers here are ordered by family count only, with names not rolled up to corporate group. Following one filer's record history requires looking past this aggregate view.
Open Patsnap EurekaWatch the incomplete years fill in
2022 onward in the filing trend is still publishing. Revisiting the trend in future periods will show how those years settle relative to the 2019 peak of 193 records.
Open Patsnap EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Suggested next steps. No new data: every figure named here is one of those above. Derived from one Patsnap search for Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure 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 about this dataset
This search returns 772 simple patent families and 1,974 published records matching split gate or split-gate flash memory terms across titles, abstracts and claims. The family count de-duplicates a single invention across the countries it was filed in, while the record count treats each publication separately, so the same invention can produce several records. No date limit was applied to the search, so this reflects every matching record the database holds regardless of filing year.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd is named on 182 of the 772 simple patent families in scope, a 23.6% share and the largest single-row figure among the 87 listed filers. That figure describes one row only; filer names are not rolled up to corporate group, so related-looking entries such as two rows both starting with Silicon Storage Technology-type names are listed separately and cannot be added together. A larger family count reflects filing volume, not claim strength or enforceability.
It shows both patterns at once. One filer holds 182 of 772 families (23.6%), while 52 of the 87 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each, indicating a long tail of smaller filers alongside the larger row. Because filer rows overlap when a family names more than one filer, these counts cannot be summed into a single concentration percentage.
Within the IPC classification data, H01L (semiconductor devices) appears on 74.1% of the 772 families, the highest share of any subclass, followed by H10B (memory device manufacture) at 50.9%, G11C (static & digital memories) at 28.8%, and H10D (semiconductor devices, general) at 15.7%. A single family can carry several of these classes at once, which is why the shares add up to more than 100% rather than partitioning the dataset. The search returned 20 subclasses in total, and these four carry the largest shares among them.
Published records moved from 86 in 2018 to 60 in 2021, a -30% change over that span, with a peak of 193 records in 2019. Years from 2022 onward are still filling in because a filing typically takes 18 to 30 months to publish, so those recent years understate their eventual totals and should not be read as a decline. The 2018-to-2021 window is the most recent stretch that can be treated as reasonably complete for trend purposes.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure 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 Split Gate Flash Memory Cell Structure Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole split gate flash memory cell structure patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
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:(("split gate" OR "split-gate") AND flash AND (cell OR structure))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 (H01L) carries 74.1% 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 1,974 records and 772 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 (13 of them here). 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 30 of the 87 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 87 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, and the growth figure stops at 2021. 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 (720 of 1,974). 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.
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.