CDT Oxford Limited
USPTO PatentsView assignee record - 6 granted patents across 15 technology areas, recorded in grant years 2015–2017. Grant-trend analysis is cross-referenced to USPTO Patent Public Search; it does not measure application filings, current R&D, or legal strength. Primary class: H10K (Organic Electric Solid-state Devices).
The verdict
According to USPTO PatentsView, CDT ranks #39,367 of 49,997 tracked US assignees by granted-patent volume, with 6 patents across 15 technology areas.
- #39,367
- of 49,997 US assignees by volume
- 45th percentile
- by Innovation Score (33.5/100)
- 21.8
- avg claims per patent
- -100%
- grant velocity, last 5 yrs
USPTO PatentsView assignee plate
Corpus R39367 · Foreign Corporation #39,367 · 6 grants
GRANTS-MICRO · LOWER-Q · PHOTO-FINISH · CPC-FOCUS · INNOV-THIN · CLAIMS-DENSE · TYPE-FRNCORP · VEL-DROP · BOOK-FULL
- GRANTS-MICRO 6 grants
- LOWER-Q #39,367/49,997
- PHOTO-FINISH Cccc Highway…
- CPC-FOCUS H10K · 15 areas
- INNOV-THIN 33.5/100
- CLAIMS-DENSE 21.8 claims/avg
- TYPE-FRNCORP Foreign Corp
- VEL-DROP -100% vel
- BOOK-FULL 10/10 fields
Nearest grant-volume peer: Cccc Highway Consultants Co. Ltd. (±0 grants)
Instrument codes from this assignee’s USPTO PatentsView grant sheet: volume band, corpus rank, photo-finish peer, lead CPC, Innovation Score, claim depth, assignee type, velocity, and book completeness. Not a USPTO rating of patent strength.
How CDT’s 33.5 Innovation Score adds up
The same four weighted components behind every Innovation Score on PlainPatent: portfolio volume, grant velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth.
Innovation-score neighbourhood around CDT
Lowest and highest poles plus nearest Innovation Score peers, not a full corpus board reprint.
- Qualcomm Incorporated · highest
Qualcomm Incorporated · highest
85 score
- CDT Oxford · this assignee 34
CDT Oxford · this assignee
34 score
- 3D Lighting… · lowest 7
3D Lighting… · lowest
7 score
What this shows CDT's Innovation Score is 33.5/100 (45th percentile of the PatentsView-derived corpus). The chart places that score against the nearest Innovation Score peers plus corpus poles, not a reprint of the volume ranking.
Does more volume mean deeper claims for CDT?
Each dot is one of CDT’s 8 nearest volume peers (same corpus rank neighbourhood as the chart above), placed by total granted patents (horizontal) against average claims per patent (vertical). CDT’s own 21.8 claims/patent is ABOVE the 12.5 median for these volume peers. More thorough claims than most filers at this scale, not just more of them.
Where CDT's grants concentrate
CDT Oxford Limited is a focused PatentsView assignee: 15 CPC subclasses with 83.3% of grants classified under H10K (Organic Electric Solid-state Devices). Peak complete grant year is 2015 (5 grants) versus a trough of 1 in 2017. By volume, CDT sits between Cccc Highway Consultants Co. Ltd. and Celltrend GMBH.
Who files at CDT's volume?
Granted US patents 2015–2025 versus its nearest-ranked assignees by volume, this company marked ◀
- Cccc Highway Cons…
Cccc Highway Consultants Co. Ltd.
6 patents
- CCD Holdinas
CCD Holdinas LLC
6 patents
- CCP Technology
CCP Technology GMBH
6 patents
- CD Acquisitions
CD Acquisitions, LLC
6 patents
- Cefo
Cefo Co., Ltd.
6 patents
- Cell ID PTE
Cell ID PTE Ltd
6 patents
- Cellcentric
Cellcentric Ltd
6 patents
- Celltrend
Celltrend GMBH
6 patents
- CDT Oxford ◀
CDT Oxford Limited
6 patents
What this shows CDT holds 6 patents at rank #39,329, shown against the 8 assignees closest to it in grant volume rather than the industry's largest filers.
Companies ranked near CDT
By rank, the assignees closest to #39,329 in granted patent volume.
- Cccc Highway Consultants Co. Ltd. #39,325 · 6 patents
- CCD Holdinas LLC #39,326 · 6 patents
- CCP Technology GMBH #39,327 · 6 patents
- CD Acquisitions, LLC #39,328 · 6 patents
- Cefo Co., Ltd. #39,330 · 6 patents
- Cell ID PTE Ltd #39,331 · 6 patents
- Cellcentric Ltd #39,332 · 6 patents
- Celltrend GMBH #39,333 · 6 patents
Leaders in H10K (Organic Electric Solid-state Devices)
Other assignees with the most granted patents in CDT's primary technology class.
- Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. 12,550 in class
- BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. 4,700 in class
- LG Display Co., Ltd. 3,613 in class
- Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. 2,381 in class
- Chengdu BOE Optoelectronics Technology Co., Ltd. 1,241 in class
- Japan Display Inc. 1,176 in class
- Wuhan China Star Optoelectronics Semiconductor Display Technology Co., Ltd. 1,105 in class
- Universal Display Corporation 1,023 in class
CDT's Innovation Score vs. every tracked assignee
Composite of portfolio volume, grant velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth (0–100)
34 45th percentile higher than 45% of 49,997 US assignees
Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more US assignees. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count, share, and where it sits relative to this entry.
Source USPTO PatentsView, PlainPatent Innovation Score · 2015–2025
Grants by year
Teal-shaded recent years (2020–present) versus the 2015–2019 baseline. Full figures in the table below.
View data table
| Year | Patents Granted | Share of Period |
|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 5 | 83.3% |
| 2017 | 1 | 16.7% |
Which technologies does CDT Oxford Limited patent most?
Top 15 of 15 technology areas
Data Source
USPTO PatentsView, US granted patents 2015–2025
What to do with this data
CDT Oxford Limited's patent record in context - here's where to go next.
- CDT Oxford Limited's lead technology class is H10K (Organic Electric Solid-state Devices), 83.3% of its portfolio - see every assignee active in that class. Explore H10K
- Ranked #39,367 of 49,997 tracked assignees by patent volume - see the full leaderboard. See the ranking
- Compare CDT Oxford Limited against Cccc Highway Consultants Co. Ltd., an assignee filing at a similar volume. Compare portfolios
- Innovation Score of 33.5/100 blends volume, velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth. How it's calculated
Figures reflect USPTO PatentsView grant data through May 2026; pending applications not yet granted are not counted.
Every figure on PlainPatent is rendered directly from USPTO source data, no number is typed in by an editor. This page draws directly on USPTO source data, no figure is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of May 2026.