PlainPatent
USPTO 2015–2025 USPTO PatentsView US Corporation

Fisker IP/AUSTRIA Assets Trust

USPTO PatentsView assignee record - 12 granted patents across 0 technology areas, recorded in grant years 2025–2025. Grant-trend analysis is cross-referenced to USPTO Patent Public Search; it does not measure application filings, current R&D, or legal strength.

RSS updates for this company
Explore the portfolio See the ranking

The verdict

According to USPTO PatentsView, Fisker ranks #22,581 of 49,997 tracked US assignees by granted-patent volume, with 12 patents across 0 technology areas.

#22,581
of 49,997 US assignees by volume
1st percentile
by Innovation Score (9.5/100)
1.0
avg claims per patent

USPTO PatentsView assignee plate

Corpus R22581 · US Corporation #22,581 · 12 grants

GRANTS-MICRO · MID-PACK · PHOTO-FINISH · CPC-UNK · INNOV-LOW · CLAIMS-SPARSE · TYPE-USCORP · SPAN-YRS · BOOK-RICH

  • GRANTS-MICRO 12 grants
  • MID-PACK #22,581/49,997
  • PHOTO-FINISH Filobe
  • CPC-UNK CPC blank
  • INNOV-LOW 9.5/100
  • CLAIMS-SPARSE 1.0 claims/avg
  • TYPE-USCORP US Corporation
  • SPAN-YRS 2025–2025 · 1y
  • BOOK-RICH 8/10 fields

Nearest grant-volume peer: Filobe 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 Fisker’s 9.5 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 Fisker

Lowest and highest poles plus nearest Innovation Score peers, not a full corpus board reprint.

score

What this shows Fisker's Innovation Score is 9.5/100 (1st 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.

Source USPTO PatentsView, PlainPatent Innovation Score As of 2015–2025

Does more volume mean deeper claims for Fisker?

Each dot is one of Fisker’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). Fisker’s own 1.0 claims/patent is at or below the 13.9 median for these volume peers. Volume here does not track with deeper claims; several lower-volume peers claim more thoroughly per patent.

Fisker vs its 8 nearest volume peers: granted patents vs average claims per patent. Source: USPTO PatentsView. 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 9 entities by Granted patents (volume) (X) and Avg claims / patent (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Volume + depthSelective & thoroughVolume over depthLean filer 11.911.91212.1 010203040 Granted patents (volume) Avg claims / patent Filobe Co., Ltd. - 12, 9.25FilobeFine Sinter Co., Ltd. - 12, 6.58Fine SinterFirst Quality Retail Services, LLC - 12, 6.33First Quality Ret…Fisher Jeon GAS Equipment (CHENGDU) Co., Ltd. - 12, 18.25Fisher Jeon GAS E…Fives Machining Systems, Inc. - 12, 13.92Fives Machining S…Flexcon Company, Inc. - 12, 28.67FlexconFlintstone Technology Limited - 12, 23.17Flintstone Techno…Flipp Corporation - 12, 18.08FlippFisker IP/AUSTRIA Assets Trust - 12, 1Fisker IP/Austria…
Fisker vs its 8 nearest volume peers: granted patents vs average claims per patent. Source: USPTO PatentsView.

Where Fisker's grants concentrate

Fisker IP/AUSTRIA Assets Trust is a focused PatentsView assignee: 0 CPC subclasses . By volume, Fisker sits between Filobe Co., Ltd. and Flipp Corporation.

Who files at Fisker's volume?

Granted US patents 2015–2025 versus its nearest-ranked assignees by volume, this company marked ◀

patents

What this shows Fisker holds 12 patents at rank #22,574, shown against the 8 assignees closest to it in grant volume rather than the industry's largest filers.

Source USPTO PatentsView, granted utility patents As of 2015–2025

Companies ranked near Fisker

By rank, the assignees closest to #22,574 in granted patent volume.

Assignees with similar portfolio profiles

Two PlainPatent-derived peer sets for Fisker, neither rank-band nor same-CPC leaders (those blocks stay above).

Similar innovation score

Nearest assignees by Innovation Score (9 here).

CJ E&M Corporation 9 Ponycycle, Inc. 10 Signet Group Services US Inc. 9 Logue AND Co. PTY Ltd., AS Trustee FOR A.T. & L.M. Logue Family Trust 10

Fisker's Innovation Score vs. every tracked assignee

Composite of portfolio volume, grant velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth (0–100)

9 1st percentile higher than 1% of 49,997 US assignees

This assignee 0 100 every tracked assignee, bucketed by value

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 2025–2019 baseline. Full figures in the table below.

View data table
Fisker IP/AUSTRIA Assets Trust patent grants by year, 2015–2025
Year Patents Granted Share of Period
2025partial year 12 100.0%

More on this record

Data Source

USPTO PatentsView, US granted patents 2015–2025

View all rankings → How is Innovation Score calculated?

What to do with this data

Fisker IP/AUSTRIA Assets Trust's patent record in context - here's where to go next.

  • Ranked #22,581 of 49,997 tracked assignees by patent volume - see the full leaderboard. See the ranking
  • Compare Fisker IP/AUSTRIA Assets Trust against Filobe Co., Ltd., an assignee filing at a similar volume. Compare portfolios
  • Innovation Score of 9.5/100 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.

Data sourced from USPTO PatentsView - official U.S. government patent data. See our methodology for computation details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainPatent

Disclaimer: This information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. Data is sourced from the USPTO PatentsView database. Consult a qualified professional before making decisions based on this data.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sources used on this page
  • USPTO PatentsView - the disambiguated bulk patent-grant, assignee, and CPC data this page's figures are derived from. patentsview.org
  • Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) - the joint USPTO/EPO classification scheme used to group patents by technology area. cooperativepatentclassification.org
  • USPTO Patent Public Search - the official interface to verify the status of any individual patent. ppubs.uspto.gov

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.