Cell Sorting Technology Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Concentration is modest at the top. the leading ten assignees together hold 16.2% of all 83,460 records in scope, with the single leader at 2,665 — well short of a lock on the field.
- Filing has cooled from its peak. activity peaked in 2018 at 1,210 records and, on the last complete comparison, fell 42% from 1,042 in 2021 to 606 in 2024.
- Claims skew therapeutic, not instrumental. A61K medicinal preparations (14.9% of records) and C12N microorganism/genetic engineering (12.0%) outweigh G01N material analysis and testing (6.0%), the more instrument-centric class.
Filing growth compares 2021 (1,042 records) with 2024 (606) — 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 83,460 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the cell sorting patent record actually covers
The search corpus behind this page combines core cell-sorting terms — fluorescence activated cell sorting, droplet cell sorter — with operational qualifiers like sort purity, aerosol containment, sort speed and nozzle clogging. That pairing pulls in two different kinds of applicant: instrument and workflow developers claiming sorting mechanics, and biopharma and academic groups claiming downstream uses of sorted cell populations, especially in antibody engineering and gene therapy. The dataset spans 83,460 published records from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off.
Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any trend understate real activity; the last year that can be read as complete is 2024. The IPC composition below reflects that mixed applicant base — medicinal-preparation and genetic-engineering classes sit ahead of the analytical-instrumentation class that a purely mechanical reading of "cell sorting" might suggest.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 83,460-record corpus: the year-by-year filing curve, and the IPC subclasses that carry the claim volume.
Filing rose to a 2018 peak, then eased
Records climbed from 1,102 in 2017 to a peak of 1,210 in 2018. On the most recent complete comparison, filings fell 42% from 1,042 in 2021 to 606 in 2024 — a real pullback, though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in under the usual 18-month publication lag and should not be read as a continuation of the decline.
Therapeutic and genetic-engineering classes dominate the claim space
A61K medicinal preparations (14.9% of the 83,460 records) and C12N microorganisms and genetic engineering (12.0%) lead, ahead of C07K peptides and proteins (9.7%) and A61P therapeutic activity (7.0%). G01N material analysis and testing, the class closest to sorting instrumentation itself, sits at 6.0% — a reminder that most of this corpus is claimed around what sorted cells are used for, not how the sorter works.
Shares are the percentage of the 83,460 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Cell Sorting Technology with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cell sorting technology and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records other filings build on
Methods of isolating hepatic progenitors (US20020016000A1)
This invention relates to methods of isolating hepatoblasts utilizing panning techniques and fluorescence activated cell sorting. This invention further relates to isolated hepatoblasts and to a method of treating liver dysfunction as well as to methods of forming artificial livers.Filed by Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University; published 2002-02-07.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7521541B2 | Cysteine engineered antibodies and conjugates | 3,827 |
| 2 | US5399346A | Gene therapy | 3,651 |
| 3 | US5328470A | Treatment of diseases by site-specific instillation of cells or site-specific transformation of cells and kit… | 1,899 |
| 4 | WO2004063351A2 | IDENTIFICATION AND ENGINEERING OF ANTIBODIES WITH VARIANT Fc REGIONS AND METHODS OF USING SAME | 1,571 |
| 5 | US5252479A | Safe vector for gene therapy | 1,384 |
| 6 | WO2006034488A2 | Cysteine engineered antibodies and conjugates | 1,103 |
| 7 | US20070134251A1 | Assays and methods using biomarkers | 1,096 |
| 8 | WO1992008802A1 | Bispecific antibodies, method of production, and uses thereof | 975 |
| 9 | WO2001088197A2 | Methods and compositions for interaction trap assays | 901 |
| 10 | US20040072278A1 | Microfluidic particle-analysis systems | 873 |
Citation counts favour older records simply by virtue of time in the corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a ranking of current commercial relevance.
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 freedom-to-operate
Three findings that shape where a new filing is likely to run into dense prior art, and where it is not.
No single assignee controls the field
The leader holds 2,665 records and the tenth-ranked holder 970 — a meaningful gap, but the combined top-10 share of 16.2% of all 83,460 records leaves most of the field in a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants. That pattern favours a targeted freedom-to-operate search over blanket avoidance of any one assignee.
Filing has pulled back from its 2018 peak
Activity peaked at 1,210 records in 2018 and has since cooled, falling 42% from 1,042 in 2021 to 606 in 2024. That is a genuine decline over a comparable three-year window, not an artefact of publication lag, since 2024 is the last year treated as complete.
Claims cluster around therapeutic use, not sorting hardware
A61K medicinal preparations leads at 14.9% of the 83,460 records, more than double the 6.0% share held by G01N material analysis and testing. A filer claiming sorter mechanics alone is competing in a comparatively less crowded class than one claiming a therapeutic application of sorted cells.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cell sorting technology, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the door is still open
The ranked leaders sit inside a broader field where most activity comes from single-digit filers — a structure that rewards specificity over scale.
One clear leader, no runaway monopoly
The top-ranked assignee holds 2,665 records against a fifth-place figure of 1,332 and a tenth-place figure of 970 — a steep but not extreme drop-off, consistent with a field several large biopharma and university programmes compete in rather than one any single group controls.
A small set of dense co-filing relationships
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data; the strongest links a biopharma pair at 291 shared records, with university-institute pairs following. These are tight, repeatable collaborations rather than a broad web — useful signals for who to watch for joint licensing or co-development activity.
Recent-year activity has slowed across most tracked leaders
Several of the assignees with the deepest historical filing records show sharp year-over-year declines in the latest year, some down to zero. Given the 18-month publication lag, this likely reflects filings still working through the pipeline rather than a genuine stop in R&D.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Atyr Pharma, Inc. | 1 | 0% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 1 | -88% |
| Genentech, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | -100% |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 0 | -100% |
| Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH | 0 | -100% |
| Atyr Pharma, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Pangu Biopharma Limited | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape points to next steps rather than final answers — each of these narrows the question to something a specific team can act on.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on a specific claim
The long tail below the top 10 means blanket avoidance is the wrong strategy; a targeted search against the specific IPC subclass and assignee cluster relevant to your claim is more efficient.
Explore in EurekaTrack momentum on the assignees you compete with
Year-over-year figures for individual assignees shift faster than aggregate trends — worth monitoring directly rather than inferring from the corpus-wide curve.
Explore in EurekaScope a filing into the under-claimed sub-areas
Nozzle clogging mitigation and droplet sorter throughput control carry comparatively thinner claim density than the therapeutic core — a plausible opening for a hardware-focused filer.
Explore in EurekaCommon questions about cell sorting patents
The dataset behind this page contains 83,460 published records from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off that match cell-sorting terms combined with operational qualifiers like sort purity, sort speed and nozzle clogging. This counts records, not distinct inventions, since a single family can generate multiple publications across jurisdictions. Treat it as the scope of the searched corpus rather than a global total for every cell-sorting patent ever filed.
No single company dominates: the top-ranked assignee holds 2,665 of the 83,460 records, and the combined top 10 hold 13,494 records, or 16.2% of the total. That leaves the large majority of filings spread across a long tail of assignees with far fewer records each, including numerous universities and biopharma companies filing on downstream therapeutic uses of sorted cells rather than sorting hardware itself. A freedom-to-operate search should therefore check the specific claim area rather than assume one company blocks the field.
Filing peaked in 2018 at 1,210 records and has since pulled back, falling 42% from 1,042 records in 2021 to 606 in 2024, the last year that can be treated as complete. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the lower figures shown for 2025 and 2026 are still filling in and should not be read as evidence the decline is continuing. The genuine three-year drop through 2024, however, is a real signal worth factoring into any competitive timing decision.
The corpus is spread across several IPC subclasses rather than one dominant class. A61K medicinal preparations leads at 14.9% of the 83,460 records, followed by C12N microorganisms and genetic engineering at 12.0% and C07K peptides and proteins at 9.7%. G01N material analysis and testing, the class most directly tied to sorting instrumentation, sits lower at 6.0%, showing that most claim activity centres on therapeutic and biological applications of sorted cells rather than the sorting mechanism itself.
Sub-areas tied to sorter mechanics and operational reliability — nozzle clogging mitigation, aerosol containment design, droplet sorter throughput control, and index sorting data workflows — carry comparatively thinner claim density than the therapeutic core of the corpus, which is dominated by A61K and C12N classes. That does not mean these areas are empty, but the concentration of filings elsewhere suggests less crowded claim space for a filer focused on instrumentation and workflow rather than downstream biological use.
Research Cell Sorting Technology in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cell sorting technology 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.