inSleep Technologies, LLC
USPTO PatentsView assignee record - 6 granted patents across 2 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: A61M (Devices FOR Introducing Media Into, OR Onto, THE Body ; Devices FOR Transducing Body Media OR FOR Taking Media From THE Body ; Devices FOR Producing OR Ending Sleep OR Stupor).
The verdict
According to USPTO PatentsView, insleep ranks #40,949 of 49,997 tracked US assignees by granted-patent volume, with 6 patents across 2 technology areas.
- #40,949
- of 49,997 US assignees by volume
- 3rd percentile
- by Innovation Score (14.3/100)
- 4.3
- avg claims per patent
- -100%
- grant velocity, last 5 yrs
USPTO PatentsView assignee plate
Corpus R40949 · US Corporation #40,949 · 6 grants
GRANTS-MICRO · LOWER-Q · PHOTO-FINISH · CPC-NARROW · INNOV-LOW · CLAIMS-SPARSE · TYPE-USCORP · VEL-DROP · BOOK-FULL
- GRANTS-MICRO 6 grants
- LOWER-Q #40,949/49,997
- PHOTO-FINISH iMICRODATA
- CPC-NARROW A61M · 2 areas
- INNOV-LOW 14.3/100
- CLAIMS-SPARSE 4.3 claims/avg
- TYPE-USCORP US Corporation
- VEL-DROP -100% vel
- BOOK-FULL 10/10 fields
Nearest grant-volume peer: iMICRODATA Corporation (±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 insleep’s 14.3 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 insleep
Lowest and highest poles plus nearest Innovation Score peers, not a full corpus board reprint.
- Qualcomm Incorporated · highest
Qualcomm Incorporated · highest
85 score
- inSleep · this assignee 14
inSleep · this assignee
14 score
- 3D Lighting… · lowest 7
3D Lighting… · lowest
7 score
What this shows insleep's Innovation Score is 14.3/100 (3rd 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 insleep?
Each dot is one of insleep’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). insleep’s own 4.3 claims/patent is at or below the 14.5 median for these volume peers. Volume here does not track with deeper claims; several lower-volume peers claim more thoroughly per patent.
Where insleep's grants concentrate
inSleep Technologies, LLC is a focused PatentsView assignee: 2 CPC subclasses with 33.3% of grants classified under A61M (Devices FOR Introducing Media Into, OR Onto, THE Body ; Devices FOR Transducing Body Media OR FOR Taking Media From THE Body ; Devices FOR Producing OR Ending Sleep OR Stupor). Peak complete grant year is 2016 (4 grants) versus a trough of 1 in 2015. By volume, insleep sits between iMICRODATA Corporation and noonee AG.
Who files at inSleep's volume?
Granted US patents 2015–2025 versus its nearest-ranked assignees by volume, this company marked ◀
- imicrodata
iMICRODATA Corporation
6 patents
- iographer
iOgrapher, LLC
6 patents
- irepertoire
iRepertoire, Inc.
6 patents
- ispot tv
iSpot.tv, Inc.
6 patents
- intest
inTEST Corporation
6 patents
- iobridge
ioBridge, Inc.
6 patents
- justservice net
justservice.net LLC
6 patents
- noonee
noonee AG
6 patents
- insleep ◀
inSleep Technologies, LLC
6 patents
What this shows inSleep holds 6 patents at rank #44,264, shown against the 8 assignees closest to it in grant volume rather than the industry's largest filers.
Companies ranked near inSleep
By rank, the assignees closest to #44,264 in granted patent volume.
Leaders in A61M (Devices FOR Introducing Media Into)
Other assignees with the most granted patents in inSleep's primary technology class.
- Becton, Dickinson and Company 1,249 in class
- Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH 1,159 in class
- Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. 901 in class
- Koniniklijke Philips N.V. 836 in class
- Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited 773 in class
- Covidien LP 726 in class
- Terumo Kabushiki Kaisha 724 in class
- ResMed Pty Ltd 682 in class
insleep's Innovation Score vs. every tracked assignee
Composite of portfolio volume, grant velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth (0–100)
14 3rd percentile higher than 3% 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 | 1 | 16.7% |
| 2016 | 4 | 66.7% |
| 2017 | 1 | 16.7% |
Which technologies does inSleep Technologies, LLC patent most?
Top 2 of 2 technology areas
Data Source
USPTO PatentsView, US granted patents 2015–2025
What to do with this data
inSleep Technologies, LLC's patent record in context - here's where to go next.
- inSleep Technologies, LLC's lead technology class is A61M (Devices FOR Introducing Media Into, OR Onto, THE Body ; Devices FOR Transducing Body Media OR FOR Taking Media From THE Body ; Devices FOR Producing OR Ending Sleep OR Stupor), 33.3% of its portfolio - see every assignee active in that class. Explore A61M
- Ranked #40,949 of 49,997 tracked assignees by patent volume - see the full leaderboard. See the ranking
- Compare inSleep Technologies, LLC against iMICRODATA Corporation, an assignee filing at a similar volume. Compare portfolios
- Innovation Score of 14.3/100 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.