Beer Filtration Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 43.2% of activity sits with five assignees. 273 of 632 records in scope belong to the top five filers combined, a tight concentration for a processing-technology field this old.
- Filing is still growing, not fading. Complete-year filings rose from 12 in 2021 to 15 in 2024, a 25% increase over that span, even as 2025-26 figures look lower due to publication lag.
- Enzyme science dominates the claim space. C12N (microorganisms & genetic engineering) touches 44.5% of the 632 records, well ahead of dedicated separation-process filings under B01D at 9.3%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (12 records) with 2024 (15) — 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 632 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 632 published patent records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine beer filtration or colloidal stabilization language with specific technical routes: crossflow membranes, filter-aid replacement, haze formation, polyphenol removal, oxygen pickup and shelf-life extension. The scope deliberately pairs process claims with the underlying enzyme and protein chemistry that most modern stabilization methods rely on, which is why microorganism and genetic-engineering classifications outnumber pure separation-process classifications in this corpus.
Reading the data this way surfaces a field where the chemistry of haze-forming compounds and the enzymes used to remove them are claimed far more heavily than the mechanical filtration hardware itself. That split matters for anyone deciding where a new filing has room to stand or where it will land on top of dense prior art.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 632 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings peaked at 35 in 2018, dipped, then rebuilt to 15 by 2024 (+25% from 12 in 2021) before the 2025-26 counts understate true activity because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C12N (44.5%) and C12H beverage treatment (30.9%) lead the 632-record set; B01D separation processes and B01J catalysis each sit at 9.3%, marking the mechanical and physical-process side as comparatively lighter-claimed.
Shares are the percentage of the 632 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Beer Filtration and Colloidal Stabilization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about beer filtration and colloidal stabilization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
US20100009031A1 — Improved brewing process (DSM IP Assets B.V., 2010-01-14)
The present invention relates to the use of a proline-specific protease for accelerating the beer brewing process. In particular, it relates to the use of a proline-specific protease for accelerating the beer brewing process by shortening and simplifying the stabilisation phase of beer production. The stabilisation period as such can be omitted from the beer making process hereby saving significant costs and adding to the flexibility of beer producing plants.Filed by DSM IP Assets, this record claims enzymatic shortening of the stabilisation phase itself, not just haze-removal chemistry — a process-timing claim that sits adjacent to, rather than directly on top of, the polyphenol-removal enzyme filings that dominate the most-cited table.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2003106654A2 | Xylanases, nucleic adics encoding them and methods for making and using them | 123 |
| 2 | WO2005003319A2 | Glucanases, nucleic acids encoding them and methods for making and using them | 101 |
| 3 | EP0208450A2 | Beer filtration | 93 |
| 4 | WO2005027953A2 | Use of proline specific endoproteases to hydrolyse peptides and proteins | 91 |
| 5 | WO2008143679A2 | Nucleic acids and proteins and methods for making and using them | 88 |
| 6 | WO2009020459A2 | Glucanases, nucleic acids encoding them and methods for making and using them | 87 |
| 7 | US20070031399A1 | Use of proline specific endoproteases to hydrolyse peptides and proteins | 87 |
| 8 | US4726955A | Preparation of finely divided, pulverulent carotenoid preparations | 85 |
| 9 | US20070254063A1 | Use of hop polyphenols in beer | 84 |
| 10 | US20110296543A1 | Nucleic acids and proteins and methods for making and using them | 83 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate references; treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not as a ranking 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 data means for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the records are grouped by assignee, class and year.
Activity concentrates fast at the top
The leading assignee alone accounts for 89 of the 632 records, and the top five combined reach 273 records — 43.2% of everything in scope. By the tenth-ranked assignee the combined share reaches 64.1% (405 records), meaning more than a third of the field is spread across the remaining 90 ranked filers plus unranked entrants.
Growth is real, not an artefact of recent noise
Complete-year filings climbed from 12 in 2021 to 15 in 2024, a 25% rise over three years, after the field's peak year of 35 filings in 2018. The lower counts in 2025-26 reflect publication lag rather than a slowdown, since publication trails filing by roughly 18 months.
Biology claims outweigh hardware claims
C12N (microorganisms & genetic engineering) touches 44.5% of the 632 records while B01D (separation processes, including filtration) sits at just 9.3%, tied with B01J catalysis. The imbalance suggests most differentiation in this field is happening in enzyme and protein chemistry rather than in membrane or filter-aid hardware design.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to beer filtration and colloidal stabilization, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Verenium Corp | BP Corp North America Inc | 29 |
| Verenium Corp | Syngenta Participations AG | 16 |
| BP Corp North America Inc | Syngenta Participations AG | 10 |
| International Flavors & Fragrances (Denmark) ApS | Danisco US Inc | 4 |
| Novozymes AS | Carlsberg Breweries AS | 4 |
| International Flavors & Fragrances (Denmark) ApS | MILLER LONE BROEND | 3 |
| Verenium Corp | California Institute of Technology | 3 |
| Verenium Corp | The Regents of the University of California | 3 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset; the strongest pairing recurs at 29 shared records, with two further pairings at 16 and 10, indicating a small cluster of repeat collaborators rather than broad cross-industry co-filing.
Who is filing, and where the field is open
The ranking spans 100 companies counted by record; a handful account for most of the volume, while momentum in the latest year has largely stalled across the biggest names.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 89 of the 632 records, roughly a third more than the fifth-place filer's 35. That gap, combined with the top-five combined share of 43.2%, points to a field where a small number of programmes have built durable claim positions over the 2015-2026 window.
Latest-year activity has cooled for most leaders
Several of the most active historical filers show zero records in the latest year, including entries with -100% year-on-year change, while one assignee posted 3 records in the latest year for +200% growth. Latest-year figures are the most affected by publication lag, so these should be read as early signal, not a verdict on strategic direction.
A tight cluster of repeat collaborators
The strongest co-assignee pairing in the dataset shares 29 records, with two other pairings at 16 and 10 records among the same small group of organisations. This clustering suggests joint enzyme-development or licensing arrangements concentrated among a few players rather than an industry-wide collaboration pattern.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| International Flavors & Fragrances (Denmark) ApS | 3 | +200% |
| Verenium Corp | 0 | — |
| BP Corp North America Inc | 0 | — |
| DSM IP Assets BV | 0 | -100% |
| Lubrizol Advanced Materials Inc | 0 | — |
| Avacta Life Sciences | 0 | -100% |
| Novozymes AS | 0 | — |
| Carlsberg Breweries AS | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or identifying a filing gap.
Check freedom-to-operate against the enzyme cluster
Given that C12N and C07K claims cover a large share of the 632 records, any new stabilization method involving proteases or glucanases should be checked against the most-cited filings before development proceeds.
Explore claim scope in EurekaMap the separation-hardware gap
With B01D at only 9.3% of records, membrane and filter-aid replacement hardware looks comparatively open relative to the enzyme chemistry crowding the rest of the field.
Run a white-space search in EurekaTrack the co-filing cluster
The strongest co-assignee pairing shares 29 records; understanding the licensing or joint-development structure behind it can clarify whether a partnership or a standalone filing is the better route.
Trace assignee relationships in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
One assignee leads the field with 89 of the 632 records in scope, noticeably ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 35. The top five combined account for 43.2% of all records, and the top ten reach 64.1%, so filing activity is concentrated among a small group rather than spread evenly across the 100 companies in the ranking. Anyone assessing competitive position should look closely at that leading group's claim scope before assuming open space.
Filings grew from 12 in 2021 to 15 in 2024, a 25% increase over that three-year span, following an earlier peak of 35 filings in 2018. The lower figures shown for 2025 and 2026 do not indicate a slowdown; publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any patent dataset are always undercounted. The safest read is that the field has been rebuilding filing volume through 2024, with true 2025-26 activity not yet fully visible.
Microorganism and genetic-engineering classifications (C12N) appear in 44.5% of the 632 records, followed by beverage treatment (C12H) at 30.9% and brewing of beer (C12C) at 28.3%. Dedicated separation-process claims under B01D, which cover crossflow membranes and filter-aid technology directly, sit much lower at 9.3%. This means most patent activity in the field is built around the enzymes and proteins used to remove haze-forming compounds rather than around filtration hardware itself.
Separation-process hardware (B01D) and catalysis-based processes (B01J) each cover only 9.3% of the 632 records, far below the enzyme-chemistry classifications that dominate the corpus. That gap suggests crossflow membrane engineering, filter-aid-free clarification equipment, and real-time process monitoring such as oxygen pickup sensing carry lighter claim density than protease or glucanase chemistry. A new filing anchored in mechanical or sensing innovation, rather than another enzyme variant, is less likely to collide with the densest prior art in this dataset.
Citation counts in this dataset range up to 123 for the most-referenced record, but citation counts inside any searched corpus naturally favour older filings that have simply had more years to accumulate references. A high citation count signals historical influence on later filings, not that the technology is still the most commercially relevant option today. When evaluating current freedom-to-operate risk, citation rank should be paired with filing recency and assignee activity rather than used on its own.
Research Beer Filtration and Colloidal Stabilization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole beer filtration and colloidal stabilization 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.