Acrylic Acid Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees together hold 84 of 123 records in scope (68.3%), and the top ten hold 91.1% — a thin tail beyond that.
- Filing has cooled since 2017. Filings peaked at 8 in 2017 and had fallen to a 2022 midpoint of 1, with recent-year momentum flat to zero across the named leaders.
- Bio-based routes sit alongside the classical process. C12P fermentation and enzymatic synthesis classes appear on 16.3% of records, the same share as B01J catalysis — propylene oxidation is not the only route being claimed.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent activity in acrylic acid and acrylate ester production, spanning two-stage oxidation catalysts, polymerization inhibitor chemistry, esterification, glacial acrylic acid purification, and bio-based routes to acrylic acid. It draws on 123 published records filed between 2015 and 2026, classified under C07C57, C07C67 and B01J23. Coverage includes both the classical propylene-oxidation pathway and renewable feedstock alternatives claimed as substitutes for it.
Publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so counts for the most recent year in any trend chart understate real activity and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 123 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims sit under.
A peak in 2017, then a decline
Filings reached 8 in 2017, the high point of the window, then dropped toward a 2022 midpoint of 1. That trajectory points to a field where the core process claims were staked out early and later activity has been comparatively thin, rather than one still building toward a peak.
C07C dominates; catalysis and bio-routes run level
C07C covers 96.7% of the 123 records, which is expected given the search scope. Below that, B01J catalysis and C12P fermentation/enzymatic synthesis each sit at 16.3%, followed by C07B, C08F, C08G, B01D and C01B in single digits — a signal that purification, polymer downstream and separation claims are present but comparatively sparse.
Shares are the percentage of the 123 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Acrylic Acid and Acrylate Ester Production with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about acrylic acid and acrylate ester production and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this space
Acrolein and acrylic acid production from glycerin mixtures (EP2186790B1)
The filing discloses a method for producing acrolein from a glycerin mixture containing a fatty acid, fatty acid salt or fatty acid ester, dehydrating the glycerin to yield an acrolein mixture, then collecting acrolein and reacting it to produce acrylic acid — framed as a lower-energy route than conventional propylene oxidation.Filed by Showa Denko K.K.; granted 2016-04-13.
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US8026386B2 | Methods for the synthesis of olefins and derivatives | 50 |
| 2 | WO2013185009A1 | Renewable acrylic acid production and products made therefrom | 48 |
| 3 | US20150183708A1 | Renewable Acrylic Acid Production and Products Made Therefrom | 46 |
| 4 | WO2017023777A1 | Production system/production process for acrylic acid and precursors thereof | 45 |
| 5 | EP1298120A2 | Method for producing (meth)acrylic acid | 43 |
| 6 | WO2017165323A1 | Improved acrylic acid production process | 36 |
| 7 | WO2009045637A2 | Methods for the synthesis of olefins and derivatives | 35 |
| 8 | EP1396484A1 | Method for preventing polymerization in an acrylic acid manufacturing process | 34 |
| 9 | US20090155866A1 | Methods for the synthesis of olefins and derivatives | 30 |
| 10 | US9850192B2 | Renewable acrylic acid production and products made therefrom | 26 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to be cited; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not of current commercial importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
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 →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 →What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-outs from the same dataset, each pointing at a different practical question: where the claim density already sits, how the field's momentum has moved, and which routes are actually being contested.
A small group holds most of the claim space
The top five assignees account for 68.3% of all 123 records in scope, and the top ten reach 91.1%. For a new entrant, that means the core two-stage oxidation and esterification claims are heavily occupied territory, and freedom-to-operate work should start by mapping those leaders' portfolios directly rather than the field broadly.
Activity has cooled from its 2017 high
Filings peaked at 8 in 2017 and fell to a midpoint of 1 by 2022, and the named leading assignees each show zero filings in the latest year on record. That pattern is consistent with a mature process area where the foundational claims were filed early, though the most recent years are understated by publication lag.
Bio-based routes run level with catalytic routes
B01J (catalysis) and C12P (fermentation and enzymatic synthesis) each appear on 16.3% of the 123 records, meaning bio-based acrylic acid production is claimed about as often as classical catalytic steps within this scope. Purification and downstream polymer classes — C07B, C08F, C08G, B01D, C01B — each sit in single digits, suggesting comparatively lighter claim coverage there.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to acrylic acid and acrylate ester production, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it is open
The ranking spans 37 companies across 123 records, led by a single assignee at 20 records with the fifth-ranked holder at 11 and the tenth at 3 — a steep drop-off that defines both the crowded core and the open edges.
One assignee sets the pace
The leading assignee holds 20 of the 123 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 11. That gap suggests a genuine first-mover position on core process claims rather than a crowded plateau at the very top.
A steep decline after the top five
Holdings fall from 11 records at fifth place to 3 at tenth, and the top ten together still account for 91.1% of all 123 records. Beyond tenth position, the remaining assignees in the ranking of 37 hold small, thin portfolios.
Co-filing is limited and concentrated
Ten co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, with the strongest link tied to a single pairing of two related corporate entities at 7 shared records. Most collaboration ties in this field involve inventors named alongside a single corporate assignee rather than joint ventures between competing companies.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation | 0 | — |
| Nippon Shokubai Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Genomatica, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Rohm and Haas Company | 0 | -100% |
| Novomer, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Arkema France SA | 0 | — |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | 0 | — |
| General Electric Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to a field with an occupied core and a thin, specific edge. Two directions follow from that.
Map the top ten before drafting new claims
With 91.1% of records held by ten assignees, a freedom-to-operate review should start with those portfolios directly rather than a broad novelty search across the full 37-company ranking.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for real headroom
Purification, inhibitor formulation and separation-integration claims sit in single digits against the 123-record total — worth a targeted search before assuming the space is open.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions on acrylic acid patent activity
The dataset ranks 37 companies by record count, with the top-ranked assignee holding 20 of the 123 records in scope. The top five combined hold 68.3% of all records, and the top ten hold 91.1%, which means most of the field's granted and published claims sit with a small group of established chemical manufacturers rather than being spread evenly. Any competitive review should start with that top ten before looking at the long tail.
Filing activity peaked at 8 in 2017 within this dataset's 2015–2026 window and had fallen to a midpoint of 1 by 2022, with the named leading assignees showing zero filings in the most recent year on record. That said, publication lag of roughly 18 months means the last one to two years are always undercounted, so the true recent picture is somewhat stronger than the raw trend line shows. On balance, this reads as a mature area with declining rather than accelerating filing volume.
The classical route, covered by C07C and B01J classifications, centers on catalytic two-stage oxidation of propylene. Bio-based routes, tracked under C12P (fermentation and enzymatic synthesis), appear on 16.3% of the 123 records in scope — the same share as B01J catalysis — indicating the two approaches are claimed at comparable frequency within this dataset rather than one dominating. Renewable-feedstock filings, including glycerin-based acrolein routes, sit alongside conventional propylene oxidation claims rather than replacing them.
Classes tied to purification, inhibitor formulation, separation and downstream polymer chemistry — C07B, C08F, C08G, B01D and C01B — each appear on well under 10% of the 123 records, compared with 96.7% for the core C07C class. That gap suggests these adjacent process steps carry thinner prior art than the core oxidation and esterification claims, though a thin count reflects narrower search scope as much as open opportunity, so a targeted clearance search is still needed before relying on it.
The assignee ranking covers 37 companies, but ownership is heavily skewed: the top five hold 68.3% of the 123 records and the top ten hold 91.1%, leaving a long tail of companies with only a handful of records each. The drop from 11 records at fifth place to 3 at tenth place illustrates how sharply holdings fall off outside the leading group. This pattern is typical of a chemical process area where foundational claims were staked early by a few large manufacturers.
Research Acrylic Acid and Acrylate Ester Production in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole acrylic acid and acrylate ester production corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
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 inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. 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, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently 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.
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.