Patent Mining for Business Insights: RFID Case Study

©2015 TechIPm, LLC All Rights Reserved www.techipm.com
Patent Miningfor Business Insights:
RFID Case Study
This research project was performed in 2008

©2015 TechIPm, LLC All Rights Reserved www.techipm.com 2
1. Executive Summary .............................................................................................7
2. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………... 14
2.1 What is RFID Innovation FrontlineTM? ……………….…………………………....15
2.2 What’s in RFID Innovation FrontlineTM? …….…………..………………………...16
2.3 Mining Process for RFID Innovation FrontlineTM ……..…………………………..18
3. IF StatisticsTM ……………………………………...……………………….……….....19
3.1 Number of Patents by Year ………………………………………………………...20
3.2 Number of Patents by Assignee ……………………………………………..…….23
3.3 Number of Patents by Assignee’s Nationality ………………………………..…..26
3.4 Number of Patents by UPC …………………………………………...……………29
3.5 Number of Patents by US Family …………………………………………...……..32
3.6 Number of Patents by International Family ……………………………………….35
3.7 Number of Patents by Forward Citation …………………………………………..38
Table of Contents

4. IF AnalyticsTM ……………………………………...……………………….……….....41
4.1 Customized Classifications Used in RFID Innovation FrontlineTM ……………..42
4.2 Cites per Patent ……………………………………………………………………..68
4.3 Patent Impact Index …………………………………………………………………71
4.4 Patent Family Size …………………………………………………………………..74
4.5 PFS vs. CPP Matrix …………………………………………………………………77
4.6 Technology Development Snapshot for UHF Tag Antenna …………………….80
5. IF EnterpriseTM …………………………………...……………………….……….....81
5.1 Number of Patents by Assignees for Customized Classifications …………….82
5.2 Patent Portfolio by Assignee ………………………………………………………94
5.3 Activity Index for Intermec’s RFID Patents ………………………………….…..94
5.4 Citations Matrix for Intermec’s RFID Patents …………………………………..105
5.5 Competitor Analysis: Intermec vs. Motorola ……………………………………111
Table of Contents -2

Fig. 3.1 Growth trends for the RFID technology innovations …………………………21
Fig. 3.2 Top 10 Assignees for the RFID Technology Innovations ……………………24
Fig 3.3 Top 10 Assignees’ Nationality …………………………………………………..27
Fig. 3.4 Top 10 UPC Main Classes for the RFID Technology Innovations ……….…30
Fig 3.5 Top 10 Patents by the number of US Families ………………………………..33
Fig 3.6 Top 10 Patents by the number of International Families ………….………….36
Fig 3.7 Top 10 Most Cited Patents ………………………………………………………39
Fig 4.1.1-1 Growth Trends for the RFID Classes by Issued Year …………………..48
Fig 4.1.1-2 Growth Trends for the RFID Classes by Application Year ……….……..50
Fig 4.1.2 Distribution of Patents among RFID Classes ………………………………52
Fig 4.1.3 Distribution of Patents among Tag Sub-classes ……………………………54
Fig 4.1.4 Distribution of Patents among Reader Sub-classes …………………….….56
Fig 4.1.5 Distribution of Patents among Sub-system Sub-classes ……………….…58
Fig 4.1.6 Distribution of Patents among Application Sub-classes …………………...60
Fig 4.1.7 Distribution of Patents among Testing Method Sub-classes ……………...62
Fig 4.1.8 Distribution of Patents among Product Sub-classes …………………….…64
Fig 4.1.9 Distribution of Patents among Market Sub-classes ………………………..66
Fig. 4.2 CPP for Customized Classifications of RFID Patents ……………………….69
List of Figures

Fig. 4.3 PII for Customized Classifications of RFID Patents …………….……………72
Fig. 4.4 PFS for Customized Classifications of RFID Patents ………………………..75
Fig. 4.5 PFS vs. CPP matrix for the classifications of RFID patents ………………78
Fig. 5.1.1 Top 20 Assignees for RFID Technology Innovations ……………………...84
Fig. 5.1.2 Top 10 Assignees for Tag Technology Innovations ……………………….86
Fig. 5.1.3 Top 10 Assignees for Reader Technology Innovations …………………...88
Fig. 5.1.4 Top 10 Assignees for Sub-system Technology Innovations ……………...90
Fig. 5.1.5 Top 10 Assignees for Application Technology Innovations ……………….92
Fig. 5.2.1 Top 10 Assignees’ RFID Patent Portfolios ………………………………….96
Fig. 5.2.2-1 Top 10 Assignees’ Patent Portfolios for Customized Sub-classes …….98
Fig. 5.2.2-2 Top 10 Assignees’ Patent Portfolios for Tag Chip/IC …………….…….100
Fig. 5.2.2-3 Top 10 Assignees’ Patent Portfolios for Tag Antenna …………………101
Fig. 5.2.2-4 Top 10 Assignees’ Patent Portfolios for Tag Manufacturing ………….102
Fig. 5.2.2-5 Top 10 Assignees’ Patent Portfolios for Tag Architecture …………….103
Fig. 5.2.2-6 Top 10 Assignees’ Patent Portfolios for Reader Protocol …………….104
Fig. 5.3 Activity Index for Intermec’s RFID Patents ………………………………….106
Fig. 5.4 Citation portfolios for Intermec’s RFID patents ……………………………..109
Fig. 5.5 Intermec vs. Motorola RFID Patent Portfolios ………………………………112
List of Figures -2

1
3
4
5
IF AnalyticsTM
2 Introduction
IF StatisticsTM
Executive Summary
IF EnterpriseTM
1

Executive Summary
This is a brief report for results from for Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Innovation
FrontlineTM research. RFID Innovation FrontlineTM shows a technology innovations
landscape for Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). RFID Innovation FrontlineTM
utilizes patent information to assess the state of the art for technology innovations in
RFID. RFID Innovation FrontlineTM analyzes the utility patents issued in the United
States (US) before January 1, 2009.
The first part of RFID Innovation FrontlineTM is the IF StatisticsTM. IF StatisticsTM shows
a RFID technology innovations landscape from the statistical analysis of bibliographical
patent information such as the application/published/issued year, assignees, inventors,
and patent classification codes etc. Key findings in the IF StatisticsTM are as follows:
Growth trends for the RFID technology innovations show that the active technology
innovations started from 1999 and peaked at 2004. The results also show that the RFID
technology lies nearly at the end of technology development stage of the technology life
cycle as of December 31, 2008.
Micron Technology is the leader in RFID technology innovations followed by Intermec
as of December 31, 2008. Motorola merged with Symbol appears as a strong contender
for leading the RFID technology innovations.

US leads the RFID technology innovations (75% share in issued patents) followed by
Japan and Germany .
The US Patent Classification (UPC) classifies RFID mainly as communication and data
processing technology and applications.
The second part of RFID Innovation FrontlineTM is the IF AnalyticsTM . IF AnalyticsTM
shows a RFID technology innovations landscape from the in-depth quantitative and
qualitative analysis of patent information by customized technology classifications:
•Main classes: Tag, Reader, Sub-system, Application, Testing Method
•Tag sub-classes: IC/Chip, Chipless, Protocol, Antenna, Sensing, Special, Packaging,
Manufacturing, Architecture
•Reader sub-classes: IC/Module, Protocol, Antenna/RF, Design/Platform,
Control/Operation
•Sub-system sub-classes: Middleware & IT System, Multi-component, Label Printer
•Application sub-classes: Automation, Verification/Access Control, Tracking/Locating,
Transaction, Item Management
•Testing method sub-classes: Tag Testing, System Testing, Site Survey, Installation
Executive Summary -2

Application main class is further classified as product sub-classes and market sub-
classes:
•Product sub-classes: Medical Device, Image Forming Device, Document,
Computing/Communication Device, and Automobile/Tire
•Market sub-classes: Retail, Healthcare, Logistics, Transportation, Security, Asset
Management, Manufacturing, Entertainment, Financial Service
Key findings in IF AnalyticsTM are as follows:
Application is the most active field of RFID technology innovations followed by tag.
Architecture is the most active field of tag technology innovations followed by IC/chip.
Protocol is the most active field of reader technology innovations followed by
antenna/RF.
Multi-component is the most active field of sub-system technology innovations followed
by label printer.

Automation is the most active field of application technology innovations followed by
item management.
Automobile/tire is the most active field of technology innovations in product sub-
classes followed by computing/communication device.
Asset management is the most active field of technology innovations in market sub-
classes followed by security.
Method for tag testing is the most active field of technology innovations in testing
method sub-classes followed by system testing.
Cites per patent (CPP) is a mean value of citations received by a specific patent class
from subsequent patents. High CPP value is often associated with important innovations,
which are key to future development in technology innovations. Tag antenna, tag
architecture, and reader protocol are the top three classes in high value of CPP.

Patent Impact Index (PII) is the CPP for a specific class divided by the CPP for all
classes. A class with PII higher than 1 means that this class consists of high quality
patents for competitiveness in technology innovations compare to other classes. Tag
antenna, tag architecture, reader protocol, reader design/platform, and multi-component
sub-system are the sub-classes that the value of PII is higher than 1
Patent Family Size (PFS) is the number of international families (foreign patent
applications) for a specific class divided by the total number patents for all classes.
A class with high value of PFS means that this class may have be competitive in market
share of emerging global market compare to other classes. Transaction application
shows the highest value of PFS.
The last part of RFID Innovation FrontlineTM is the IF EnterpriseTM. IF EnterpriseTM
shows a RFID technology innovations landscape for a specific company. In addition to
all the contents in the IF StatisticsTM and IF AnalyticsTM, IF EnterpriseTM can include
analysis for a specially requested research by customer:
•Duo diligence for patent portfolios
•Strategy for the patent portfolio development

Key findings in IF EnterpriseTM are as follows:
Micron Technology is the reader in tag innovations followed by Intermec and Motorola.
Micron Technology and Motorola are leaders in reader innovations followed by
Intermec and Impinj.
ZIH and Fargo Electronics are leaders in sub-system innovations followed by Motorola
and SAP.
IBM is a leader in application innovations followed by Motorola.
A visualization of each assignee’s patent portfolios in a single chart can give a
competitive landscape for the RFID technology innovations. Micron Technology and
Intermec have strong patent portfolios in tag and reader. IBM has strong patent
portfolios in application.
Micron Technology has strong patent portfolios in tag IC/chip while Intermec has
strong patent portfolios in tag architecture

Intermec is a leader in tag antenna innovations followed by 3M and Motorola.
Micron Technology is a leader in tag manufacturing innovations followed by Avery
Dennison and Motorola.
Intermec is a leader in tag architecture innovations followed by Micron Technology and
Motorola.
Micron Technology is a leader in reader protocol innovations followed by Intermec and
Motorola.
Activity Index (AI) is a measure of a company’s innovation activities in a specific
technology field. AI for Intermec shows that tag packaging technology is the most active
of Intermec’s innovations followed by sensing tag.
A chart for Backward Citation vs. Forward Citation matrix may be used to show a
quality landscape of a company’s patent portfolios. A study for the Intermec’s Backward
Citation vs. Forward Citation matrix shows that a large number of Intermec’s RFID
patents are located in high values in forward citation and low values in backward citation.

1
3
4
5
IF AnalyticsTM
Introduction
IF StatisticsTM
Executive Summary
IF EnterpriseTM
22

2.1 What is RFID Innovation FrontlineTM?
RFID Innovation FrontlineTM is a research report on the technology innovations
landscape for Radio Frequency Identification (RFID).
RFID Innovation FrontlineTM utilizes patent information to assess the state of the art for
technology innovations in RFID.
RFID Innovation FrontlineTM analyzes the utility patents issued in the United States (US)
before January 1, 2009. Since the patent information are changed over time, this report
only reflects the technology innovations landscape up to the time the analysis is
conducted.
RFID Innovation FrontlineTM is based on the statistical and analytical methods for mining
patent information.
Research for RFID Innovation FrontlineTM is done by an expert both in intellectual
property (IP) and technology subject matter.
RFID Innovation FrontlineTM can be used by customers for:
•Trend analysis for RFID technology/product/market forecasting
•Planning RFID technology/business strategy
•Competitive Intelligence for RFID industry
•IP strategy for RFID R&D
•Opportunity analysis for RFID technology licensing

2.2 What’s in RFID Innovation FrontlineTM?
1. IF StatisticsTM
IF StatisticsTM shows technology innovations landscape from the statistical analysis of
bibliographical patent information such as the application/published/issued year,
assignees, inventors, and patent classification codes etc.:
•Number of issued patents/published applications by application and issued year
•Ranking information by assignee (or inventor), nationality, UPC (or IPC), patent families,
and citations
2. IF AnalyticsTM
IF AnalyticsTM shows the technology innovations landscape from the in-depth
quantitative and qualitative analysis of patent information by customized technology
classifications:
•Number of patents by customized technology classifications
•Top assignees’ patent portfolios by customized technology classifications
•Innovation indexes such as cites per patent (CPP), patent impact index (PII), and patent
family size (PFS)
•Technology development snapshot for a focused field of technology

2.2 What’s in RFID Innovation FrontlineTM? -2
3. IF EnterpriseTM
IF EnterpriseTM shows the technology innovations landscape for specific companies. In
addition to all the contents in the IF StatisticsTM and IF AnalyticsTM , IF EnterpriseTM can
include analysis for a specially requested research by customers:
•Duo diligence
•Strategy for the patent portfolio development

2.3 Mining Process for RFID Innovation FrontlineTM
Step 1. Getting Patent Data:
•Patent Data Base Used in the Research: USPTO PAIR, WIPSGlobal, and Delphion
•Searching Method: keyword search for RFID and its variations such as IC tag, RF card,
and RF label etc.
•Field of Search: front page (title, abstract, references etc.) and the first independent
claim of a patent issued before January, 1, 2009
Step 2. Cleaning: review the keyword searched patent data for excluding design patents
and patents whose subject field is not directly related with RFID (e.g. CallerID)
The number of patents reduces to 2559 from 3703 initially keyword searched patents in
this step.
Step 3. Statistical analysis: analyze the bibliographical information
Step 4. Customized technology classifications: classification by RFID expert
Step 5. Analytical analysis: quantitative and qualitative analysis for patent data
categorized by the customized classifications

1
3
4
5
IF AnalyticsTM
Introduction
IF StatisticsTM
Executive Summary
IF EnterpriseTM
2
3

3.1 Number of Patents by Year
Since the United States is such a large market for products and services from nearly all
technology innovations, a patent counting for growth in patenting over a period of times
and distribution across technology areas can be a good measuring tool for monitoring
the evolution of technology innovations.
Since there is usually a time lag between the initial application date and the issue date
by two to three years, both of issued date and application date are used in this research.
This report analyzes the RFID patents issued by USPTO before January 1, 2009.
Fig. 3.1 shows the growth trends for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: active technology innovations started from 1999 and peaked at 2004
The results show that the RFID technology lies nearly at the end of technology
development stage of the technology life cycle as of December 31, 2008.

01 00 00 00 00 02 01 20 18 19 7
20 9
33
2031263627
68
35
102
47
159
90
155
122
186
116
254
116
282
168
498
191
478
404
194
546
37
630
5
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
NumberofPatents
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
RFID Issued Patents
Patents by Issued Year
Patents by Application Year
Fig. 3.1 Growth trends for the RFID technology innovations

Table 3.1 Data for fig. 3.1
Year 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Number of
Patents
by Issued Year 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 9 20
Number of
Patents
by Application
Year 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 8 9 20 33 31
Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Number of
Patents
by Issued Year 26 27 35 47 90 122 116 116 168 191 404 546 630
Number of
Patents
by Application
Year 36 68 102 159 155 186 254 282 498 478 194 37 5

3.2 Number of Patents by Assignee
Number of patents for an assignee divided by the total number of patents gives what
percentage the assignee contributes to the RFID technology innovations. Ranking the
assignees by the number of issued patents is thus an important part of visualizing the
innovations landscape.
Fig. 3.2 shows the top 10 assignees for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology including Micron Communications is a leader in
the RFID technology innovations followed by Intermec
It is interesting to note that the recent promotion of Motorola merged with Symbol as a
strong contender for leading the RFID technology innovations.

Fig. 3.2 Top 10 assignees for the RFID technology innovations
Top 10 Assignees for RFID Issued Patents
Micron Technology;
123
Intermec; 111
IBM; 107Motorola(Symbol);
104
3M; 51
Avery Dennison; 45
Hitachi; 36
Impinj; 35
Fujitsu; 31
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 27

Assignee Number of Patents
Micron Technology 123
Intermec 111
IBM 107
Motorola(Symbol) 104
3M 51
Avery Dennison 45
Hitachi 36
Impinj 35
Fujitsu 31
Battelle Memorial Institute 27

3.3 Number of Patents by Assignee’s Nationality
Percentage by the total number of patents issued to assignees with foreign nationality
shows how strong the domestic innovation activities compare to the foreign innovation
activities.
Fig. 3.3 shows top 10 nationality for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: US leads the innovations followed by Japan and Germany

Top 10 Nationality of Applicants for RFID Issued Patents
1785
244
65 39 39 38 31 21 1816
US
JP
DE
CA
TW
KR
FI
CH
FR
GB
Fig 3.3 Top 10 assignees’ nationality

Assignee’s Nationality Number of Patents
US 1785
JP 244
DE 65
CA 39
TW 39
KR 38
FI 31
CH 21
FR 18
GB 16

3.4 Number of Patents by UPC
The US Patent Classification (UPC) system classifies patents by function, structure,
product, and industry use. Ranking the patents by the number of a specific UPC can
provide insight about the field of applications for the developed technology innovations.
Fig. 3.4 shows the top 10 UPC main classes for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: UPC classifies RFID mainly as communication and data processing
technological applications

Fig. 3.4 Top 10 UPC main classes for the RFID technology
innovations
Top 10 UPC Classes for RFID Issued Patents
340; 1278
235; 402 343; 101
455; 83
342; 48
705; 40
700; 36
370; 30
702; 23
438; 22
Other; 111
340 COMMUNICATIONS: ELECTRICAL
235 REGISTERS
343 COMMUNICATIONS: RADIO WAVE
ANTENNAS
455 TELECOMMUNICATIONS
342 COMMUNICATIONS: DIRECTIVE
RADIO
WAVE SYSTEMS AND DEVICES (E.G.,
RADAR, RADIO NAVIGATION)
705 DATA PROCESSING: FINANCIAL,
BUSINESS PRACTICE, MANAGEMENT,
OR COST/PRICE DETERMINATION
700 DATA PROCESSING: GENERIC
CONTROL SYSTEMS OR SPECIFIC
APPLICATIONS
370 MULTIPLEX COMMUNICATIONS
702 DATA PROCESSING: MEASURING,
CALIBRATING, OR TESTING
438 HAVING ORGANIC SEMICONDUCTIVE
COMPONENT

UPC Class Total
340 1278
235 402
343 101
455 83
342 48
705 40
700 36
370 30
702 23
438 22

3.5 Number of Patents by US Family
A member of the US family is the related patents such as continuation, continuation-in
part, and divisional patent applications. Ranking the patents by the number of US family
patents can provide information about the genealogical dynamics for the technology
innovations.
Fig. 3.5 shows the top 10 RFID patents by the number of US family patents.
Key interpretation: assignees for the top 10 patents by the number of US family patents
are as follows
Patent Number Assignee
US6644771 Silverbrook Research
US6947571 Digimarc
US7406214 Digimarc
US7089099 Automotive Technologies International
US6244512 Intermec
US7360689 American Express Travel

Fig 3.5 Top 10 patents by the number of US family patents
US6644771; 936
US6947571; 546
US7406214; 530
US7089099; 322
US6484080; 321
US6820897; 302
US6244512; 268
US7360689; 147
US7303120; 145
US7059531; 145
Top 10 RFID Patents by Number of US Family Patents

Patent Number Number of US Family Patents
US6644771 936
US6947571 546
US7406214 530
US7089099 322
US6484080 321
US6820897 302
US6244512 268
US7360689 147
US7303120 145
US7059531 145

3.6 Number of Patents by International Family
When one US patent results in several patent applications in many different countries,
all of the patent applications associated with the US patent is called the international
family patents. A large number of international family patents could mean the US patent
can be competitive in market share of emerging global market.
Fig. 3.6 shows the top 10 RFID patents by the number of international family patents.
Key interpretation: assignees for the top 10 patents by the number of US family patents
are as follows
US6644771 Silverbrook Research
US6947571 Digimarc
US7406214 Digimarc

Fig 3.6 Top 10 patents by the number of international family
patents
US6644771; 480
US6947571; 212
US7406214; 212
US7360689; 168US7303120; 168
US7059531; 168
US7249112; 167
US7306158; 157
US7239226; 157
US7119659; 157
Top 10 RFID Patents by Number of International Family Patents

Patent Number Number of International Family Patents
US6644771 480
US6947571 212
US7406214 212
US7360689 168
US7303120 168
US7059531 168
US7249112 167
US7306158 157
US7239226 157
US7119659 157

3.7 Number of Patents by Forward Citation
A number of forward citations is a count for how many citations a patent receives from
subsequent patents. A highly cited patent could represent an important technology
innovations.
Fig. 3.7 shows the top 10 most cited patents for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: assignees for the top 10 most cited patents are as follows
US5528222 IBM
US5629981 Texas Instruments
US5963134 Checkpoint
US6100804 Intermec
US5682143 IBM
US5317309 Westinghouse
US5497140 Micron Technology
US6025780 Checkpoint
US5936527 E-Tag Systems
US6107920 Motorola

Top 10 Most Cited RFID Patents
US5528222; 308
US5629981; 297
US5963134; 206
US6100804; 176US5682143; 157
US5317309; 146
US5497140; 142
US6025780; 140
US5936527; 140
US6107920; 132
Fig 3.7 Top 10 most cited patents

Patent Number Number of Citations
US5528222 308
US5629981 297
US5963134 206
US6100804 176
US5682143 157
US5317309 146
US5497140 142
US6025780 140
US5936527 140
US6107920 132

1
3
4
5
IF AnalyticsTM
Introduction
IF StatisticsTM
Executive Summary
IF EnterpriseTM
2
4

4.1 Customized Classifications Used in RFID
Innovation FrontlineTM
Main Classes: Tag, Reader, Sub-system, Application, Testing Method
Tag sub-classes:
•IC/Chip:semiconductor devices, memory, rectifier, demodulator, logic IC
•Chipless: organic semiconductor devices, SAW (Surface Acoustic Wave) devices
•Protocol: encoding/decoding of communication signal /data layout of tag memory
•Antenna: antenna pattern, function improvement, multi-antenna system
•Sensing: tags with sensing functionality
•Special: tags used with metal or high temperature environment, security protected tag,
privacy-aware tag
•Packaging: package assembly, attaching methods, molding and shielding methods
•Manufacturing: fabricating methods, assemblies
•Architecture: multi-band/multi-function design, physical/functional layer design,
components integration methods
Reader sub-classes:
•IC/Module: transceiver IC, DSP module RF front-end module
•Protocol: air interface protocol, anti-collision protocol, modulation protocol
•Antenna/RF: antenna arrangement, multi-band antenna, antenna multiplexer
•Design/Platform: multi-band/protocol design, portable platform, housing methods
•Control/Operation: operation methods, automatic/remote control methods

Sub-system sub-classes:
•Middleware/IT System: RFID network management, servers, visualization system, Data
acquisition/management systems, APIs
•Multi-component: tag-reader combination, tag-reader control system, RFID coupler
•Label Printer: label applicator system, tag reader/writer
Application sub-classes:
•Automation: Control/Monitoring/Informing Automation
•Verification/Access Control: user verification, security system
•Tracking/Locating: method for tracking personnel and articles, location based service
(LBS) system
•Transaction: POS transactions, electronic payment system
•Item Management: inventory, animal management, conveyor systems, manufacturing
items/tools management
Testing Method sub-classes:
•Tag Testing: tag testing device, tag performance indicator
•System Testing: system for monitoring performance of an RFID system, apparatus for
measuring a read range between a tag and a reader
•Site Survey: automatic radio site survey, method for identifying topology for RFID
deployment
•Installation: tag installation system, method for optimally placing antennas
Innovation FrontlineTM -2

Product Sub-classes for Application Class:
•Medical Device: surgical machine, implantable medical devices, Dental cleaning device
•Image Forming Device: printing apparatus, camera/camcorder
•Computing/Communication Device: wireless mouse, wireless phone, PDA
•Document: printed document
•Automobile/Tire: wheel assembly, tire pressure monitoring system

Market Sub-classes for Application Class:
•Retail: shopping cart conveyor, marketing system, self-service checkout device
•Healthcare: Drug delivery management system, orthopaedic component
•Logistics: container monitoring system, shipping pallet
•Transportation: passenger door open request system, parking system
•Security: theft protection system, portable security alarm
•Asset Management: library monitoring system, inventory control system
•Manufacturing: parts assembly management system, system for manufacturing control
•Entertainment: card game monitoring system, apparatus for identifying a golf ball
•Financial Service: ATM, device for digitizing checks

Fig 4.1.1-1 and Fig. 4.1.1-2 show growth trends for the RFID classes by issued and
application year respectively.
Key interpretation: active innovations started from 1999 and peaked at 2004 for each
type of class
Fig 4.1.2 shows the distribution of patents among customized RFID classes.
Key interpretation: application is the most active field of RFID technology innovations
followed by tag
Fig 4.1.3 shows the distribution of patents among tag sub-classes.
Key interpretation: architecture is the most active field of tag technology innovations
followed by IC/chip
Fig 4.1.4 shows the distribution of patents among reader sub-classes.
Key interpretation: protocol is the most active field of reader technology innovations
followed by antenna/RF

Fig 4.1.5 shows the distribution of patents among sub-system sub-classes.
Key interpretation: multi-component is the most active field of sub-system technology
innovations followed by label printer
Fig 4.1.6 shows the distribution of patents among application sub-classes.
Key interpretation: automation is the most active field of application technology
innovations followed by item management
Fig 4.1.7 shows the distribution of patents among testing method sub-classes.
Key interpretation: method for tag testing is the most active field of technology
innovations in testing method sub-classes followed by system testing
Fig 4.1.8 shows the distribution of patents among products in application sub-classes.
Key interpretation: automobile/tire is the most active field of technology innovations in
product sub-classes followed by computing/communication device
Fig 4.1.9 shows the distribution of patents among markets in application sub-classes.
Key interpretation: asset management is the most active field of technology innovations
in market sub-classes followed by security

0011 0001 0001 2122 5112 9632 101123
6939
126314
23
12111
48
97
24
61
234
32
50
235
37
39
113
62
57
24
11
76
54
17
18
102
86
46
27
240
147
64
33
289
166
63
54
331
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
NumberofPatents
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Issued Year
RFID Issued Patents by Classes
Application
Sub-system
Reader
Tag
Fig 4.1.1-1 Growth trends for the RFID classes by issued year

Table 4.1-1 Data for fig. 4.1-1
Issued Year Tag Reader Sub-system Application
1990 0 0 1 1
1991 0 0 0 1
1992 0 0 0 1
1993 2 1 2 2
1994 5 1 1 2
1995 9 6 3 2
1996 10 11 2 3
1997 6 9 3 9
1998 12 6 3 14
1999 23 12 1 11
2000 48 9 7 24
2001 61 23 4 32
2002 50 23 5 37
2003 39 11 3 62
2004 57 24 11 76
2005 54 17 18 102
2006 86 46 27 240
2007 147 64 33 289
2008 166 63 54 331

0000 1124 5121 8633
11
1327
127210
11
9313
38
94
16
52
17
4
28
69
28
9
52
53
28
3
69
55
24
11
94
81
23
20
130
62
26
13
179
128
49
43
268
121
52
45
244
60
29
9
93
752
21
0005
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
NumberofPatents
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Application Year
Application
Sub-system
Reader
Tag
Fig 4.1.1-2 Growth trends for the RFID classes by
application year

Table 4.1-2 Data for fig. 4.1-2
Application Year Tag Reader Sub-system Application
1990 0 0 0 0
1991 1 1 2 4
1992 5 1 2 1
1993 8 6 3 3
1994 11 13 2 7
1995 12 7 2 10
1996 11 9 3 13
1997 38 9 4 16
1998 52 17 4 28
1999 69 28 9 52
2000 53 28 3 69
2001 55 24 11 94
2002 81 23 20 130
2003 62 26 13 179
2004 128 49 43 268
2005 121 52 45 244
2006 60 29 9 93
2007 7 5 2 21
2008 0 0 0 5

Tag; 775
Reader; 326
Sub-system; 178
Application; 1240
Fig 4.1.2 Distribution of patents among RFID classes

Table 4.1.2 Data for fig. 4.1.2
Class Tag Reader Sub-system Application Testing Method
Number of
Patents 775 326 178 1240 40

RFID Issued Patents by Tag Sub-classes
128
26
59
78
201369
156
226
IC/Chip
Chipless
Protocol
Antenna
Sensing
Special
Packaging
Manufacturing
Architecture
Fig 4.1.3 Distribution of patents among tag sub-classes

Sub-class Number of Patents
IC/Chip 128
Chipless 27
Protocol 58
Antenna 78
Sensing 20
Special 13
Packaging 69
Manufacturing 156
Architecture 226

RFID Issued Patents by Reader Sub-classes
41
121
62
58
44
IC/Module
Protocol
Antenna/RF
Design/Platform
Control/Operation
Fig 4.1.4 Distribution of patents among reader sub-classes

IC/Module 41
Protocol 121
Antenna/RF 62
Design/Platform 58
Control/Operation 44

RFID Issued Patents by Sub-system Sub-classes
38
98
42
Middleware/IT System
Multi-component
Label Printer
Fig 4.1.5 Distribution of patents among sub-system sub-classes

Middleware/IT System 38
Multi-component 98
Label Printer 42

RFID Issued Patents by Application Sub-classes
622
147
274
40
157
Automation
Verification/Access Control
Tracking/Locating
Transaction
Item Management
Fig 4.1.6 Distribution of patents among application sub-classes

Automation 622
Verification/Access Control 147
Tracking/Locating 274
Transaction 40
Item Management 157

RFID Issued Patents by Testing Method Sub-classes
24
10
2
4
Tag Testing
System Testing
Site Survey
Installation
Fig 4.1.7 Distribution of patents among testing method
sub-classes

Table 4.1.7 Data for Fig. 4.1.7
Tag Testing 24
System Testing 10
Site Survey 2
Installation 4
Total 40

RFID Application Issued Patents by Product Sub-classes
Automobile/Tire; 56
Computing/Communicat
ion Device; 45
Image Forming Device;
31
Medical Device; 19
Document; 16
Fig 4.1.8 Distribution of patents among product sub-classes

Automobile/Tire 56
Computing/Communication Device 45
Image Forming Device 31
Medical Device 19
Document 16

RFID Application Issued Patents by Market Sub-classes
Asset Management; 70
Security; 68
Retail; 63
Healthcare; 53
Transportation; 39
Logistics; 34
Financial Service; 34
Entertainment; 27
Manufacturing; 21
Fig 4.1.9 Distribution of patents among market sub-classes

Sub-system Number of Patents
Asset Management 70
Security 68
Retail 63
Healthcare 53
Transportation 39
Logistics 34
Financial Service 34
Entertainment 27
Manufacturing 21

Cites per patent (CPP) is a mean value of citations received by a specific patent class
from subsequent patents. High CPP value is often associated with important
innovations, which are key to future development in technology innovations. Tag
antenna, tag architecture, and reader protocol are the top three classes in high value of
CPP.
Fig. 4.2 shows CPP for the customized classifications of RFID patents
Key interpretation: tag antenna, tag architecture, and reader protocol are the top three
classes for high value of CPP
4.2 Cites per Patent

Fig. 4.2 CPP for customized classifications of RFID patents
Cites per Patent (CPP) for RFID Issued Patents
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Aa
Ab
Ac
Ad
Ae
Af
Ag
Ah
Ai
Ba
Bb
Bc
Bd
Be
Ca
Cb
Cc
Da
Db
Dc
Dd
De
Aa IC/Chip
Ab Chipless
Ac Protocol
Ad Antenna
Ae Sensing
Af Special
Ag Packaging
Ah Manufacturing
Ai Architecture
Ba IC/Module
Bb Protocol
Bd Design/Platform
Be Control/Operation
Ca Middleware/IT System
Cb Multi-component
Cc Label Printer
Da Automation
Db Verification/Access Control
Dc Tracking/Locating
Dd Transaction
De Item Management

Sub-class CPP
Aa 9.6171875
Ab 2.851851852
Ac 9.327586207
Ad 16.54545455
Ae 9.2
Af 5.153846154
Ag 8.492753623
Ah 10.75
Ai 17.73893805
Ba 6.170731707
Bb 16.9338843
Bc 10.55555556
Bd 12.25862069
Be 7.636363636
Ca 2.973684211
Cb 12.94897959
Cc 6.19047619
Da 6.754019293
Db 3.326530612
Dc 9.46350365
Dd 4.8
De 8.433121019

Patent Impact Index (PII) is the CPP for a specific class divided by the CPP for all
classes:
PII(a class) = CPP(a class)/CPP(all classes)
A class with PII higher than 1 means that this class consists of high quality patents for
competitiveness in technology innovations compare to other classes.
Fig. 4.3 shows PII for the customized classifications of RFID patents
Key interpretation: tag antenna, tag architecture, reader protocol, reader
design/platform, and multi-component sub-system are the sub-classes that the value of
PII is higher than 1
4.3 Patent Impact Index

Fig. 4.3 PII for customized classifications of RFID patents
Patent Impact Index (PII) for RFID Issued Patents
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Aa Ab Ac Ad Ae Af Ag Ah Ai Ba Bb Bc Bd Be Ca Cb Cc Da Db Dc Dd De
Sub-class
PII
Aa IC/Chip
Ab Chipless
Ac Protocol
Ad Antenna
Ae Sensing
Af Special
Ag Packaging
Ah Manufacturing
Ai Architecture
Ba IC/Module
Bb Protocol
Bd Design/Platform
Cb Multi-component
Cc Label Printer
Da Automation
Dd Transaction
De Item Management

Sub-class PII
Aa 1.077701
Ab 0.319578
Ac 1.045248
Ad 1.854082
Ae 1.030951
Af 0.57754
Ag 0.951697
Ah 1.204644
Ai 1.987824
Ba 0.691492
Bb 1.897609
Bc 1.182855
Bd 1.3737
Be 0.85573
Ca 0.333231
Cb 1.451061
Cc 0.693704
Da 0.756855
Db 0.372771
Dc 1.060479
Dd 0.537888
De 0.945015

Patent Family Size (PFS) is the number of international families (foreign patent
applications) for a specific class divided by the total number patents for all classes:
PFS(a class) = International Family Patents(a class)/Total Patents(all classes)
A class with high value of PFS means that this class may have be competitive in market
share of emerging global market compare to other classes.
Fig. 4.4 shows PFS for the customized classifications of RFID patents
Key interpretation: transaction application shows the highest value of PFS
4.4 Patent Family Size

Patent Family Size (PFS) for RFID Issued Patnets
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Aa Ab Ac Ad Ae Af Ag Ah Ai Ba Bb Bc Bd Be Ca Cb Cc Da Db Dc Dd De
Sub-class
PFS
Fig. 4.4 PFS for customized classifications of RFID patents
Aa IC/Chip
Ab Chipless
Ac Protocol
Ad Antenna
Ae Sensing
Af Special
Ag Packaging
Ah Manufacturing
Ai Architecture
Ba IC/Module
Bb Protocol
Bd Design/Platform
Cb Multi-component
Cc Label Printer
Da Automation
Dd Transaction
De Item Management

Sub-class PFS
Aa 5.507813
Ab 4.37037
Ac 5.517241
Ad 6.207792
Ae 5.3
Af 1.769231
Ag 3.347826
Ah 6.288462
Ai 6.349558
Ba 5.170732
Bb 6.22314
Bc 6.222222
Bd 8.034483
Be 6.090909
Ca 10.02632
Cb 5.846939
Cc 11.19048
Da 6.487138
Db 4.204082
Dc 5.40146
Dd 56.925
De 6.732484

A chart for PFS vs. CPP matrix may be used to show a quality landscape for a specific
class relative to others. A specific class located in the upper right corner of the matrix
chart (high value both in PFS and CPP) may can have competitive advantage compare
to other classes in developing a successful market globally.
Fig. 4.5 shows PFS vs. CPP matrix for the customized classifications of RFID patents
Key interpretation: tag antenna, tag architecture, and reader protocol may need to
develop more international families
4.5 PFS vs. CPP Matrix

PFS vs. CPP
Aa
Ab
Ac
Ad
Ae
Af
Ag
Ah
Ai
Ba
Bb
Bc
Bd
Be
Ca
Cb
Cc
Da
Db
Dc
Dd
De
0
5
10
15
20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
PFS
CPP
Aa
Ab
Ac
Ad
Ae
Af
Ag
Ah
Ai
Ba
Bb
Bc
Bd
Be
Ca
Cb
Cc
Da
Db
Dc
Dd
De
Fig. 4.5 PFS vs. CPP matrix for the classifications of RFID patents
Aa IC/Chip
Ab Chipless
Ac Protocol
Ad Antenna
Ae Sensing
Af Special
Ag Packaging
Ah Manufacturing
Ai Architecture
Ba IC/Module
Bb Protocol
Bd Design/Platform
Cb Multi-component
Cc Label Printer
Da Automation
Dd Transaction
De Item Management

Sub Class PFS CPP
Aa 5.507813 9.4375
Ab 4.307692 2.307692
Ac 5.525424 8.59322
Ad 6.551282 16.51282
Ae 5.3 6.65
Af 1.769231 4.923077
Ag 3.347826 8.347826
Ah 6.288462 10.3141
Ai 6.349558 17.16372
Ba 5.170732 5.95122
Bb 6.22314 16.66942
Bc 5.790323 9.903226
Bd 8.034483 11.89655
Be 6.090909 6.204545
Ca 10.02632 2.263158
Cb 5.846939 12.63265
Cc 11.19048 5.452381
Da 6.487138 6.231511
Db 4.204082 2.632653
Dc 5.40146 8.543796
Dd 56.925 3.475
De 6.732484 7.598726
Ea 4.208333 6.333333
Eb 3.1 3.3
Ec 1 0
Ed 8.75 0

4.6 Technology Development Snapshot for UHF Tag Antenna
Technology development snapshot for a focused field of technology shows historical
view of a progress in innovation. Technology development snapshot in UHF tag antenna
shows application/issued year, issued number assignee, title/abstract, and drawing in a
time series of table contents.

1
3
4
5
IF AnalyticsTM
Introduction
IF StatisticsTM
Executive Summary
IF EnterpriseTM
2
5

5.1 Number of Patents by Assignee for
Customized Classifications
Ranking the assignees by the number of issued patents in a specific technology class is
an important part of visualizing the innovations landscape.
Fig. 5.1.1 shows the top 20 assignees for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology including Micron Communications is keep a
leader in the RFID technology innovations followed by Intermec and IBM
It is interesting to note the recent promotion of Motorola merged with Symbol as a strong
contender for leading the RFID technology innovations.
Fig. 5.1.2 shows the top 10 assignees for the RFID tag technology innovations.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology is the leader in tag innovations followed by
Intermec and Motorola
Fig. 5.1.3 shows the top 10 assignees for the RFID reader technology innovations.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology and Motorola are leaders in reader innovations
followed by Intermec and Impinj

Fig. 5.1.4 shows the top 10 assignees for the RFID sub-system technology innovations.
Key interpretation: ZIH and Fargo Electronics are leaders in sub-system innovations
followed by Motorola and SAP
Fig. 5.1.5 shows the top 10 assignees for the RFID application technology innovations.
Key interpretation: IBM is a leader in application innovations followed by Motorola
5.1 Number of Patents by Assignee for
Customized Classifications -2

Fig. 5.1.1 Top 20 assignees for RFID technology innovations
RFID Issued Patents for Top 20 Assignees
72
65
15
41
24
29
25
15
19
9
3
17
4
2
7
0
0
1
5
3
7
6
29
21
8
26
11
4
1
15
3
5
4
6
0
1
6
0
0
10
4
1
2
2
3
7
6
10
1
1
2
1
3
4
2
2
2
2
1
8
0
2
3
11
0
1
16
16
74
27
15
2
8
0
5
9
17
0
18
19
8
13
20
7
7
4
8
8
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Micron Technology
Intermec
IBM
Motorola(Symbol)
3M
Avery Dennison
Hitachi
Impinj
Fujitsu
Battelle Memorial
Nokia
Alien
HP
NCR
Checkpoint
SAP
American Express Travel
Sensormatic Electronics
Toshiba
ZIH
Intel
Samsung Electronics
Number of Patents
Tag
Reader
Sub-system
Application

Assignee Tag Reader Sub-system Application
Micron Technology 72 29 3 16
Intermec 65 21 7 16
IBM 15 8 6 74
Motorola(Symbol) 41 26 10 27
3M 24 11 1 15
Avery Dennison 29 4 1 2
Hitachi 25 1 2 8
Impinj 15 15 1 0
Fujitsu 19 3 3 5
Battelle Memorial Institute 9 5 4 9
Nokia 3 4 2 17
Alien 17 6 2 0
HP 4 0 2 18
NCR 2 1 2 19
Checkpoint 7 6 1 8
SAP 0 0 8 13
American Express Travel 0 0 0 20
Sensormatic Electronics 1 10 2 7
Toshiba 5 4 3 7
ZIH 3 1 11 4
Intel 7 2 0 8
Samsung Electronics 6 2 1 8

Fig. 5.1.2 Top 10 assignees for tag technology innovations
Top 10 Assignees for Tag
Micron Technology;
72
Intermec; 65
Motorola(Symbol); 41Avery Dennison; 29
Hitachi; 25
3M; 24
Fujitsu; 19
Impinj; 17
Alien; 17
IBM; 15

Intermec 65
Motorola(Symbol) 41
Avery Dennison 29
Hitachi 25
3M 24
Fujitsu 19
Impinj 17
Alien 17
IBM 15

Fig. 5.1.3 Top 10 assignees for reader technology innovations
Top 10 Assignees for Reader
Micron Technology;
29
Motorola(Symbol); 26
Intermec; 21
Impinj; 15
3M; 11
Sensormatic
Electronics; 10
IBM; 8
Alien; 6
Checkpoint; 6
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 5

Motorola(Symbol) 26
Intermec 21
Impinj 15
3M 11
Sensormatic Electronics 10
IBM 8
Alien 6
Checkpoint 6

Top 10 Assignees for Sub-system
ZIH; 11
Fargo Electronics; 11
SAP; 8Intermec; 7
Printronix; 7
IBM; 6
MS; 5
Cisco; 5
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 4
Fig. 5.1.4 Top 10 assignees for sub-system technology
innovations

ZIH 11
Fargo Electronics 11
Motorola(Symbol) 10
SAP 8
Intermec 7
Printronix 7
IBM 6
MS 5
Cisco 5

Top 10 Assignees for Application
IBM; 74
American Express
Travel; 20
NCR; 19
HP; 18
Nokia; 17
Pitney Bowes; 17
Intermec; 16
3M; 15
SAP; 13
Fig. 5.1.5 Top 10 assignees for application technology
innovations

Assignee Application
IBM 74
Motorola(Symbol) 27
American Express Travel 20
NCR 19
HP 18
Nokia 17
Pitney Bowes 17
Intermec 16
3M 15

5.2 Patent Portfolio by Assignee
A visualization of each assignee’s patent portfolios can give a competitive landscape for
the RFID technology innovations.
Fig. 5.2.1 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for the RFID technology
innovations.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology and Intermec have a strong patent portfolio in tag
and reader and IBM has a strong patent portfolio in application
Fig. 5.2.2-1 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for each customized sub-
classes.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology has a strong patent portfolio in tag IC/chip while
Intermec has a strong patent portfolio in tag architecture
Fig. 5.2.2-2 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag chip/IC sub-class.
Key interpretation: Micro Technology a leader in tag IC/chip innovations followed by
Intermec and Motorola.
Fig. 5.2.2-3 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag antenna sub-class.
Key interpretation: Intermec is a leader in tag antenna innovations followed by 3M and
Motorola.

Fig. 5.2.2-4 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag manufacturing sub-
class.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology is a leader in tag manufacturing innovations
followed by Avery Dennison and Motorola.
Fig. 5.2.2-5 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag architecture sub-class.
Key interpretation: Intermec is a leader in tag architecture innovations followed by
Micron Technology and Motorola.
Fig. 5.2.2-6 shows the top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for reader protocol sub-class.
Key interpretation: Micron Technology is a leader in reader protocol innovations followed
by Intermec and Motorola.
5.2 Patent Portfolio by Assignee -2

Fig. 5.2.1 Top 10 assignees’ RFID patent portfolios
RFID Issued Patent Portfolio for Top 10 Assignees
Micron Technology
Intermec
IBM
Motorola(Symbol)
3M
Avery Dennison
Hitachi
Impinj
Fujitsu
Battelle Memorial Institute
Tag Reader Sub-system Application

Assignee Tag Reader Sub-system Application
Micron Technology 72 29 3 16
10 10 10 10
Intermec 65 21 7 16
20 20 20 20
IBM 15 8 6 74
30 30 30 30
Motorola(Symbol) 41 26 10 27
40 40 40 40
3M 24 11 1 15
50 50 50 50
Avery Dennison 29 4 1 2
60 60 60 60
Hitachi 25 1 2 8
70 70 70 70
Impinj 17 15 1 0
80 80 80 80
Fujitsu 19 3 3 5
90 90 90 90
Battelle Memorial Institute 9 5 4 9
100 100 100 100

Fig. 5.2.2-1 Top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for customized
sub-classes
IC/Chip
Protocol
Antenna
Sensing
Special
Packaging
Manufacturing
Architecture
IC/Module
Protocol
Antenna/RF
Design/Platform
Control/Operation
Middleware/IT System
Multi-components
Label Printer
Automation
Verification/Access Control
Tracking/Locating
Transaction
Item
Management
Tag Testing
System
Testing
Micron Technology
3M
Fujitsu
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
NumberofPatents
Top 10 Assignes's portfolio by RFID Sub-classes
Micron Technology
Intermec
IBM
Motorola(Symbol)
3M
Avery Dennison
Hitachi
Impinj
Fujitsu
Battelle Memorial Institute

Table 5.2.2 Data for figs. 5.2.2-1 to 5.2.2-6
Sub-class
Micron
Technolog
y
Intermec IBM Motorola 3M
Avery
Dennison
Hitachi Impinj Fujitsu
Battelle
Memorial
Institute
IC/Chip 22 7 2 6 4 0 2 11 2 1
Protocol 4 6 1 6 0 0 3 2 0 2
Antenna 2 13 1 4 5 3 3 0 2 0
Sensing 0 4 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
Special 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Packaging 0 5 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0
Manufacturing 21 7 1 3 4 15 13 1 7 1
Architecture 20 24 9 20 10 9 3 4 8 5
IC/Module 4 2 0 2 2 1 0 2 0 1
Protocol 22 10 5 9 2 0 0 8 1 3
Antenna/RF 3 1 2 2 5 1 0 0 1 0
Design/Platform 0 4 0 7 2 1 1 0 0 1
Control/Operation 0 4 1 6 0 1 0 5 1 0
Middleware/IT System 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Multi-components 3 4 5 10 0 1 0 1 3 4
Label Printer 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
Automation 7 10 37 12 1 0 1 0 3 4
Verification/Access
Control
2 1 13 1 1 1 3 0 0 1
Tracking/Locating 4 2 20 11 2 1 0 2 3
Transaction 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Item Management 3 1 3 2 11 0 4 0 0 1
Tag Testing 1 2 0 0 0 8 0 2 1 0
System Testing 2 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Fig. 5.2.2-2 Top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag chip/IC
Top10 Assignees' Tag IC/Chip Patents
Intermec; 7
Micron Technology;
22
IBM; 2
Motorola(Symbol); 6
3M; 4
Avery Dennison; 0
Hitachi; 2
Impinj; 11
Fujitsu; 2
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 1

Fig. 5.2.2-3 Top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag antenna
Top10 Assignees' Tag Antenna Patents
Micron Technology;
2
Intermec; 13
IBM; 1Motorola(Symbol); 4
3M; 5
Avery Dennison; 3
Hitachi; 3
Impinj; 0
Fujitsu; 2
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 0

Fig. 5.2.2-4 Top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag
manufacturing
Top10 Assignees' Tag Manufacturing Patents
Micron Technology;
21
Intermec; 7
IBM; 1
Motorola(Symbol); 3
3M; 4
Avery Dennison; 15
Hitachi; 13
Impinj; 1
Fujitsu; 7
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 1

Fig. 5.2.2-5 Top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for tag
architecture
Top10 Assignees' Tag Architecture Patents
Micron Technology;
20
Intermec; 24
IBM; 9Motorola(Symbol);
20
3M; 10
Avery Dennison; 9
Hitachi; 3
Impinj; 4
Fujitsu; 8
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 5

Fig. 5.2.2-6 Top 10 assignees’ patent portfolios for reader protocol
Top10 Assignees' Reader Protocol Patents
Micron Technology;
22
Intermec; 10IBM; 5
Motorola(Symbol); 9
3M; 2
Avery Dennison; 0
Hitachi; 0
Impinj; 8
Fujitsu; 1
Battelle Memorial
Institute; 3

5.3 Activity Index for Intermec’s RFID Patents
Activity Index (AI) is a measure of a company’s innovation activities in a specific
technology field:
AI = share of a specific sub-class in a company/share of a company’s patent in total
patents, where
share of a specific sub-class in a company = patents(sub-class)/patents(company)
company/share of a company’s patent in total patents = patents(company)/patents(total)
Fig. 5.3 shows the AI for Intermec’ patent portfolios for the RFID technology innovations.
Key interpretation: tag packaging is the most active Intermec’s innovations field followed
by sensing tag

Activity Index (AI) for Intermec's RFID patents
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
IC
/C
hip
ProtocolAntennaSensing
SpecialPackaging
M
anufacturingArchitectureIC
/M
odule
Protocol
Antenna/R
F
D
esign/Platform
C
ontrol/O
peration
M
iddlew
are/IT
System
M
ulti-com
ponents
LabelPrinterAutom
ation
Verification/Access
Control
Tracking/LocatingTransaction
Item
M
anagem
ent
Tag
Testing
System
Testing
NumberofPatentsFig. 5.3 Activity index for Intermec’s RFID patents

Main Class Sub-class Intermec’s AI
Tag IC/Chip 0.754505
Protocol 1.509009
Antenna 2.377832
Sensing 3.449163
Special 0
Packaging 3.772523
Manufacturing 0.578798
Architecture 1.305089
Reader IC/Module 0.862291
Protocol 1.006006
Antenna/RF 0.402402
Design/Platform 1.509009
Control/Operation 1.341341
Sub-system Middleware/IT System 3.018018
Multi-components 0.778843
Label Printer 2.012012
Application Automation 0.794215
Verification/Access Control 0.262436
Tracking/Locating 0.268268
Transaction 2.012012
Item Management 0.241441

5.4 Citations Matrix for Intermec’s RFID Patents
Backward Citation vs. Forward Citation matrix may be used to show quality landscape
for a company’s patent portfolios. A patent located in the upper left corner of the matrix
chart (low value in backward citation and high value in forward citation) may play a very
important role for the development of innovative technology in a specific technology field.
Fig. 5.4 shows the citation portfolios for Intermec’s RFID patents.
Key interpretation: a large number of Intermec’s RFID patents are located in high values
in forward citation and low values in backward citation.

Citation Portfolio for Intermec's RFID Issued Patents
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 20 40 60 80 100
Backward Citation
ForwardCitationFig. 5.4 Citation portfolios for Intermec’s RFID patents

Patent Number Backward Citation Forward Citation
6100804 52 176
6104291 47 70
6318636 4 69
6249227 60 66
6285342 12 65
6236223 51 62
6278413 22 61
6294997 13 60
5939984 26 60
6032127 10 59
5995006 8 54
6243013 5 53
6121880 6 53
5972156 6 47
6118379 6 45
6677852 8 44
6529880 12 44
6366260 17 41
6056199 16 41
… … …

5.5 Competitor Analysis: Intermec vs. Motorola
Fig. 5.5 shows a comparison in RFID patent portfolios between Intermec and
Motorola.
Key interpretation: Intermec and Motorola have a very similar patent portfolios
as Motorola merged with Symbol

Intermec vs Motorola(Sysmbol) RFID Patents
7
0
6
13
4
0
5
7
24
2
10
1
4 4
2
4
1
10
1
2
1 1
2
6
0
6
4
0
2
0
3
20
2
9
2
7
6
0
10
0
12
1
11
1
2
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Aa
Ab
Ac
Ad
Ae
Af
Ag
Ah
Ai
Ba
Bb
Bc
Bd
Be
Ca
Cb
Cc
Da
Db
Dc
Dd
De
Ea
Sub-classes
NumberofPatents
Intermec
Motorola(Symbol)
Fig. 5.5 Intermec vs. Motorola RFID patent portfolios
Aa IC/Chip
Ab Chipless
Ac Protocol
Ad Antenna
Ae Sensing
Af Special
Ag Packaging
Ah Manufacturing
Ai Architecture
Ba IC/Module
Bb Protocol
Bd Design/Platform
Cb Multi-component
Cc Label Printer
Da Automation
Dd Transaction
De Item Management
Ea Tag Testing

Sub-class Intermec Motorola(Symbol)
Aa 7 6
Ab 0 0
Ac 6 6
Ad 13 4
Ae 4 0
Af 0 2
Ag 5 0
Ah 7 3
Ai 24 20
Ba 2 2
Bb 10 9
Bc 1 2
Bd 4 7
Be 4 6
Ca 2 0
Cb 4 10
Cc 1 0
Da 10 12
Db 1 1
Dc 2 11
Dd 1 1
De 1 2
Ea 2 0

Thank you!
If you have any questions
please contact
Dr. Alex G. Lee
at alexglee@techipm.com

Patent Mining for Business Insights: RFID Case Study

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Patent Mining for Business Insights: RFID Case Study

Ähnlich wie Patent Mining for Business Insights: RFID Case Study (20)

Mehr von Alex G. Lee, Ph.D. Esq. CLP

Mehr von Alex G. Lee, Ph.D. Esq. CLP (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Patent Mining for Business Insights: RFID Case Study