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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (6 records) with 2024 (1) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 366 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Antioxidant packages for polyolefins combine a primary phenolic antioxidant, which protects against long-term thermal degradation, with a phosphite processing stabilizer, which limits discolouration and melt-flow loss during extrusion. The search underlying this page targets records that discuss these two chemistries together against specific failure modes: melt flow stability, long-term thermal exposure, discolouration, hydrolytic stability, blooming and multiple extrusion passes. That combination narrows the field to formulation-level claims rather than broader polymer-stabiliser patents.
The 366 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, with the most recent one or two years necessarily undercounted because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months. Read the trend and concentration figures on this page with that lag in mind, particularly for any year after 2024.
The two views below cover the same 366 records from different angles: one tracks when they were filed, the other what they claim.
Filings ran from 8 in 2017 to a peak of 32 in 2018, then declined; by the last complete year in this dataset, 2021's 6 filings had fallen to 1 in 2024, an 83% drop over that three-year span. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures as still filling in rather than as evidence of a further decline.
C08K (use of additives in polymers) covers 70.8% of the 366 records, well ahead of C08L (polymer compositions) at 42.9%. Smaller but still notable shares sit in C08G condensation polymers (11.7%), C08J processing and solutions (9.3%), D01F fibre-specific claims (7.1%), C07C acyclic and carbocyclic compounds (6.6%), C10M lubricants (6.3%) and C07F organo-metallic compounds (4.6%). Because records can carry more than one class, these shares sum to well over 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 366 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about antioxidant packages for polyolefins and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe polyolefin composition combines a primary phenolic antioxidant for long-term thermal stability with a phosphite processing stabilizer for melt-processing stability, plus a separate sacrificial phosphite antioxidant specifically to reduce yellowness index. The claim distinguishes the sacrificial phosphite from the processing-stabilizer phosphite as two different compounds performing two different jobs.Filed by FINA TECHNOLOGY, INC., published 2005-01-25.

| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4187212A | Stabilization systems from triarylphosphites and phenols | 104 |
| 2 | US5124388A | Films and containers of heat resistant copolyesters | 97 |
| 3 | US4094857A | Copolymerizable phenolic antioxidant | 81 |
| 4 | US5464551A | Stabilized phosphate ester-based functional fluid compositions | 75 |
| 5 | US4290941A | Stabilization systems from triarylphosphites and phenols | 52 |
| 6 | US5596033A | Gas fade resistant stabilizer system for polypropylene fiber | 46 |
| 7 | US4548975A | Discoloration-resistant spandex fiber | 41 |
| 8 | US4185003A | Stabilized copolyetheresters | 41 |
| 9 | US7262319B2 | Phenolic antioxidants in crystalline form | 34 |
| 10 | WO1994024344A1 | Low color processing, heat and light stabilizer system for polypropylene fiber | 33 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply by having had longer to accumulate them; treat them as a signal of influence within this searched corpus, not as a ranking of current relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three patterns matter more than the raw counts: where filings are concentrated, where they have gone quiet, and where the claim language is doing the real work.
The top 5 assignees together hold 39.1% of all 366 records and the top 10 hold 57.1%, meaning close to half the field sits with 85 other filers, most with only a handful of records each. That combination — a dense top and a long tail — usually means the core chemistry is claimed but formulation-specific niches remain open.
After peaking at 32 records in 2018, filings dropped steadily; the 2021-to-2024 window alone shows an 83% fall, from 6 records to 1. Recent-year momentum data shows the leading assignees with zero filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with a mature filing area rather than an active filing race.
C08K, covering use of additives in polymers, appears in 70.8% of records against 42.9% for C08L polymer compositions. The gap suggests most competitive activity happens in how the antioxidant package is deployed and dosed rather than in new polyolefin chemistries themselves.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to antioxidant packages for polyolefins, with the prior art for and against each one.
A small number of established stabiliser and specialty-chemical suppliers account for the leading share of filings, with momentum data showing all of them quiet in the most recent tracked year.
The top-ranked assignee holds 38 records, ahead of fifth place at 18 and tenth place at 11 — a steep drop-off that marks a genuine leader rather than a crowded plateau at the top.
Between fifth place (18 records) and tenth place (11 records), the gap narrows considerably compared with the drop from first to fifth. This is where specialty-chemical suppliers and a few polymer producers compete on formulation-specific filings.
Outside the top 10, the remaining 85 companies in the ranking hold the balance of records, typically with small filing counts each. This tail is where formulation-specific or application-specific claims are more likely to have been left unaddressed by the larger players.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| SI Group Switzerland GmbH | 0 | — |
| SI GROUP SWITZERLAND (CHAA) GMBH | 0 | — |
| E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. | 0 | — |
| Eastman Chemical Company | 0 | — |
| Ciba Specialty Chemicals Holding Inc. | 0 | — |
| Covestro Deutschland AG | 0 | — |
| ADEKA Corporation | 0 | — |
| Solutia Inc. | 0 | — |
The dataset points to a mature core with specific gaps rather than an open field; the next steps depend on whether you are clearing a formulation or scouting for white space.
With additive-use claims (C08K) present in 70.8% of records and the top 10 assignees holding 57.1% of the field, any phenolic-plus-phosphite formulation should be checked against the leading filers' claim scope before commercial filing.
Run a claim comparison in Eureka →Hydrolytic stability, blooming resistance and multi-pass extrusion colour retention show thinner direct coverage than the broad additive classes; a targeted search can confirm whether a specific formulation is genuinely open.
Explore white space in Eureka →The 85 companies outside the top 10 hold meaningful individual filings; several may be worth a closer look for licensing, freedom-to-operate clearance, or acquisition diligence.
Screen the long tail in Eureka →The ranking covers 95 companies across 366 records, with a clear leader holding 38 records versus 18 at fifth place and 11 at tenth. The top 5 assignees together account for 39.1% of all records and the top 10 for 57.1%, so the field has a defined leadership group but is not dominated by a single company. The remaining 85 companies in the ranking hold the balance, typically with small individual filing counts, which is where niche or newer entrants tend to sit.
No, filing activity has declined since its peak. Filings rose from 8 in 2017 to a peak of 32 in 2018, then fell steadily; from 2021 to 2024, filings dropped 83%, from 6 records to 1. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a further decline, but the multi-year trend through 2024 is clear.
US6846859B2 claims a polyolefin composition combining a primary phenolic antioxidant for long-term thermal stability with a phosphite processing stabilizer for melt-processing stability, plus a distinct sacrificial phosphite antioxidant added specifically to reduce yellowness index. The key limitation is that the sacrificial phosphite and the processing-stabilizer phosphite must be different compounds performing separate roles. A formulation that uses a single phosphite compound for both jobs, or that addresses yellowing through a non-phosphite route, sits outside this specific claim structure, though it should still be checked against the broader stabiliser art.
The technology composition data shows additive-use claims (C08K, 70.8% of records) far outweighing base polymer-composition claims (C08L, 42.9%), which suggests most competitive activity is in how additives are dosed and combined rather than in new resin chemistries. Specific failure modes named in the underlying search — hydrolytic stability, blooming resistance and colour retention across multiple extrusion passes — appear less densely covered on their own than the broad additive-use category. Fibre-grade applications, reflected in the smaller D01F share (7.1%), are another area worth checking directly rather than assuming coverage from the general polyolefin art.
C08K (use of additives in polymers) and C08L (polymer compositions) are the two dominant classes, covering 70.8% and 42.9% of the 366 records respectively. Secondary classes worth including in a search are C08G condensation polymers (11.7%), C08J polymer processing and solutions (9.3%), and C07C and C07F for the underlying antioxidant and phosphite chemistries (6.6% and 4.6%). Because a single record can carry several of these classes, a search limited to just one will miss a meaningful share of relevant prior art.
Go past this page: query the whole antioxidant packages for polyolefins 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.