Compact & Portable Reverse Osmosis Patent Landscape
The compact and portable RO space is a mature, moderately concentrated field dominated by GE Osmonics and a small cluster of water-treatment specialists, with the United States as the overwhelmingly dominant filing jurisdiction. Annual volume has plateaued near its 2018 peak, signalling that foundational system architecture is largely locked and differentiation is shifting toward adjacent application niches.
GE Osmonics leads a moderately concentrated field anchored in the United States
GE Osmonics holds the top position in the ranking, followed by US Kidney Research Corp, Organo Corp, A. O. Smith, and Pentair Residential Filtration — a tier of established water-treatment companies and specialists that collectively dominate the upper ranks.
The top five filers account for 26% of the combined output of the hundred largest filers, indicating moderate rather than extreme concentration. A meaningful second tier — including individual inventors and smaller firms such as Bosko Robert S, General Electric Co, Coway, and Rolchigo Philip M — keeps the competitive space from being a duopoly.
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GE Osmonics Inc | 19 | |
| 2 | US Kidney Research Corp | 14 | |
| 3 | Organo Corporation | 9 | |
| 4 | A.O. Smith Corporation | 8 | |
| 5 | Pentair Residential Filtration LLC | 7 | |
| 6 | Robert S. Bosko | 7 | |
| 7 | General Electric Company | 6 | |
| 8 | Coway Co Ltd | 6 | |
| 9 | Philip M. Rolchigo | 5 | |
| 10 | Chia H. Kung | 5 |
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Robert S. Bosko | 5 | |
| 12 | Christopher J. Kurth | 5 | |
| 13 | Steven D. Kloos | 5 | |
| 14 | MIOX Corp | 4 | |
| 15 | Evoqua Water Technologies Pte Ltd | 4 | |
| 16 | Havells India Ltd | 4 | |
| 17 | Allen D. Clement | 4 | |
| 18 | Wesley L. Bradford | 4 | |
| 19 | Eco Technologies Inc | 4 | |
| 20 | Rodney E. Herrington | 4 |
The leaders’ positions are built on membrane separation (B01D) and water treatment (C02F) core patents, suggesting that any new entrant must either navigate existing claims carefully or differentiate through system integration, miniaturization efficiency, or emerging application domains.
Filing counts for 2024–2026 are likely under-reported due to standard patent publication lag; the apparent softness in the most recent periods should not be read as a structural decline. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Activity has plateaued around a 2018 peak; membrane separation and water treatment dominate the technology mix
The annual filing trend and the IPC technology composition together reveal a field that has reached structural maturity: the core technology classes are well-populated, and annual output has not expanded meaningfully beyond the levels established around 2018.
Annual filing trend
Filings rose from 4 records in 2017 to a peak of 9 in 2018, then oscillated in a narrow band through 2023. The 2024–2026 figures are compressed by publication lag and should not be interpreted as a real decline. The overall pattern is consistent with a maturing technology where incremental improvements, rather than platform-level breakthroughs, are the norm.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
B01D (separation processes / filtration) and C02F (water and wastewater treatment) together account for the overwhelming majority of IPC classifications, confirming that membrane-based purification is the core technical axis. All other branches — including A61M (body-fluid devices), B01F (mixing), and B01J (chemical/physical processes) — appear at significantly lower counts, pointing to pockets of adjacent activity that remain sparsely contested.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Point-of-use membrane filtration system
A point-of-use membrane filtration system and method for water or other liquids including an automatic control system for purge, rinse-up, sanitization, or combinations thereof. The system may be used for microfiltration, ultrafiltration or hyperfiltration (reverse osmosis) depending on the membrane pore size of the filtration cartridge employed in the… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Counter top reverse osmosis water purification sys… | 265 |
| 2 | Zero waste effluent desalination system | 134 |
| 3 | Means for desalination of water through reverse os… | 99 |
| 4 | Apparatus and method for continuous electrodeioniz… | 92 |
| 5 | Performance water purification system | 90 |
| 6 | Membrane for filtering of water | 75 |
| 7 | Apparatus and method for continuous electrodeioniz… | 73 |
| 8 | Mobile field electrical supply, water purification… | 72 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the competitive structure means for R&D investment decisions
A mature, moderately concentrated field with a dominant US jurisdiction and plateaued annual volume presents specific strategic signals: incumbent positions in core classes are entrenched, but adjacent branches remain open for differentiation.
Field has plateaued at or near its 2018 filing peak
The lifecycle stage is Maturity: annual filings have plateaued near the 2018 peak and have not resumed sustained growth. This means foundational system claims are largely established, patent thickets exist in core membrane separation and water treatment subclasses, and incremental engineering improvements are the dominant mode of innovation. New entrants should expect freedom-to-operate challenges in B01D and C02F and should prioritize claim differentiation or adjacent-domain entry.
Lifecycle: MatureModerate concentration with a meaningful second tier
With the top five filers holding 26% of the combined output of the hundred largest filers, the field is concentrated but not locked by a single dominant player. GE Osmonics leads, but US Kidney Research Corp, Organo Corp, A.O. Smith, and Pentair are all active. The presence of individual inventors and small companies in the top twenty suggests that niche system configurations remain accessible to non-incumbent innovators.
Concentration: ModerateGE Osmonics is the hub of the most active co-filing relationships
The three most active co-applicant pairs on record all converge on GE Osmonics: Philip M. Rolchigo, Christopher J. Kurth, and Steven D. Kloos each co-filed 5 patent records with GE Osmonics. This pattern suggests that GE Osmonics developed key technology through named-inventor teams rather than cross-company alliances, and that inventor-level relationships — rather than inter-firm collaborations — define the ecosystem’s co-innovation structure.
Ecosystem: Inventor-ledUS dominates; China, EPO, India, and Israel show meaningful secondary coverage
The United States accounts for 57 patent records — the largest single jurisdiction by a wide margin. China and Europe (EPO) each show 22 records, India 17, WIPO (PCT) 14, and Japan 13. Israel (12 records) and Australia (11) also appear, reflecting the global demand for portable water purification in water-stressed regions. For R&D investment, PCT and EPO filings offer the broadest multi-market coverage, while India and the Middle East represent growth markets with comparatively lighter incumbent filing density.
Geography: US-centricGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| Philip M. Rolchigo | GE Osmonics Inc | 5 |
| Christopher J. Kurth | GE Osmonics Inc | 5 |
| Steven D. Kloos | GE Osmonics Inc | 5 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
GE Osmonics leads on membrane separation depth; US Kidney Research Corp differentiates through medical-device linkage
The top two filers occupy distinct technology positions: GE Osmonics anchors its portfolio in membrane module separation and performance optimization, while US Kidney Research Corp extends into body-fluid device applications — a meaningful differentiator in the medical-use segment.
GE Osmonics
GE Osmonics holds the top position with 19 patent records. Its technology emphasis sits squarely in B01D 61 (membrane separation processes), C02F 1 (water treatment), and B01D 65 (membrane maintenance/cleaning) — a portfolio that covers the full operational lifecycle of an RO system. Applicant momentum data is not available for the current period, but the depth and breadth of its subclass coverage indicate a foundational, incumbent position that would require significant design-around effort from new entrants.
patent records: 19US Kidney Research Corp
US Kidney Research Corp ranks second with 14 patent records and is the only top-tier filer with substantial coverage in A61M 1 (devices for body fluids), alongside B01D 61 and C02F 1. This medical-application emphasis differentiates it sharply from the rest of the field and positions it as the primary incumbent in dialysis-grade and clinical portable RO — a sub-segment with regulatory and performance requirements distinct from consumer water purification.
patent records: 14Medical-device integration and chemical-process coupling are under-served adjacent branches
Beyond the dominant B01D and C02F axes, several IPC branches appear at low counts relative to the core — identifying areas where portable RO technology intersects with adjacent disciplines but has not yet attracted concentrated filing activity.
A61M · Devices for body fluids (medical RO)
With only 8 patent records under A61M in the corpus, portable RO for medical fluid management — including point-of-care dialysis and fluid purification for clinical settings — remains sparsely covered relative to the dominant water-treatment axis. US Kidney Research Corp is the primary incumbent here. The technical challenge is achieving the purity, reliability, and compactness standards required for medical regulatory approval; the entry path involves co-development with medical device OEMs or academic medical centers rather than standalone RO system design.
Search this in Eureka →B01J · Chemical/physical processes and catalysis (RO with reactive treatment)
B01J appears at only 5 patent records, suggesting that integration of compact RO with in-line chemical treatment, catalytic degradation, or advanced oxidation processes is an under-developed branch. Such hybrid systems are technically relevant for applications involving trace contaminants — pesticides, pharmaceuticals, or industrial micropollutants — where membrane rejection alone is insufficient. The entry path involves combining RO module design with catalytic reactor engineering, a cross-disciplinary gap that neither the membrane specialists nor the water-chemistry community has fully closed in the portable-system context.
Search this in Eureka →How leaders differ across membrane separation, water treatment, and adjacent technology routes
Route coverage across the main technology branches in the current evidence set.
| Player | C02F 1 · Water & wastewater treatment | B01D 61 · Separation processes (filtration etc.) | C02F 9 · Water & wastewater treatment | B01D 65 · Separation processes (filtration etc.) | B01D 63 · Separation processes (filtration etc.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GE Osmonics Inc | Strong · 22 | Strong · 25 | Absent | Strong · 19 | Moderate · 10 |
| US Kidney Research Corp | Strong · 13 | Strong · 14 | Moderate · 6 | Absent | Absent |
| Robert S. Bosko | Strong · 7 | Strong · 7 | Absent | Strong · 7 | Strong · 7 |
| Organo Corporation | Strong · 8 | Strong · 9 | Strong · 9 | Absent | Absent |
| Steven D. Kloos | Strong · 7 | Strong · 7 | Absent | Strong · 7 | Absent |
| Christopher J. Kurth | Strong · 7 | Strong · 7 | Absent | Strong · 7 | Absent |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus covers 60 patent families. Filing activity has been tracked annually from 2017 through 2026, with the most recent period subject to publication lag.
GE Osmonics holds the top position with 19 patent records. US Kidney Research Corp ranks second with 14, followed by Organo Corp with 9 and A.O. Smith with 8.
The field is assessed as Mature. Annual filings have plateaued near the 2018 peak and have not resumed a sustained upward trend, indicating that foundational system architecture is largely established.
The United States leads with 57 patent records. China and Europe (EPO) each show 22, India 17, WIPO (PCT) 14, Japan 13, and Israel 12. Australia also shows 11 records.
The most active co-filing relationships all centre on GE Osmonics: Philip M. Rolchigo, Christopher J. Kurth, and Steven D. Kloos each co-filed 5 patent records with GE Osmonics, reflecting inventor-team rather than inter-firm collaboration as the dominant co-innovation model.
A61M (devices for body fluids, 8 records) and B01J (chemical/physical processes and catalysis, 5 records) are the most sparsely covered branches adjacent to the dominant B01D and C02F core. B01F (mixing and stirring) and A61N (electrotherapy) each appear at 5 and 4 records respectively, also indicating limited incumbent coverage.
Built on Patsnap Open Platform
This report’s underlying patent dataset — filings, assignees, technology clusters — is open for developers via MCP and REST API. Free to start, 10,000 credits, no credit card required.
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.