Book a demo

Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Patents: Top Filers & Trends 2026

Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Patents: Top Filers & Trends 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/continuous-catalyst-regeneration-reforming-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Oil Refining & Lubricants
Continuous catalyst regeneration reforming patents: who holds the platinum-rhenium claims, and where filing is heading
  • Concentrated at the top. five assignees hold 67.8% of the 233 records in scope, and ten hold 83.3% — this is a field with a short list of gatekeepers, not a fragmented one.
  • Filing has cooled since its 2018 peak. from 3 filings in 2021 to 1 in 2024, a 67% drop over that span, though 2025-2026 counts are still filling in as publications lag behind filing.
  • Claims cluster almost entirely in refining chemistry. 89.7% of records sit in C10G and 54.1% in B01J, leaving control-systems and analytics classes barely touched.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
233
Published Records
68%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-67%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (3 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 233 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this technology covers

Continuous catalyst regeneration (CCR) reforming keeps a platinum or platinum-rhenium catalyst moving between reaction and regeneration zones so refiners can hold aromatics yield up without shutting the unit down to re-coke or re-chlorinate the catalyst bed. The patent activity tracked here centres on the mechanics of that cycle: catalyst circulation between reactors, chloride balance control to keep acid function stable, coke burn control during regeneration, and the metallurgy of the platinum-rhenium catalyst itself. It is a mature refining discipline, so most of the inventive activity is incremental — a new reactor internals geometry, a revised burn-zone temperature profile, a catalyst formulation tweak — rather than a new reaction chemistry.

That maturity shows up directly in the filing trend: activity peaked in 2018 and has since declined, and the assignee ranking is dominated by the handful of firms that built and still operate the largest reforming licensing businesses.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1UOP LLC98
  2. 2CHEVRON CHEMICAL COMPANY LLC24
  3. 3IFP ENERGIES NOUVELLES12
  4. 4EXXONMOBIL TECHNOLOGY & ENGINEERING CO12
  5. 5CHEVRON RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY CO12
  6. 6CHEVRON USA INC10
  7. 7MOBIL OIL CORP8
  8. 8AMOCO CORP7
  9. 9SAUDI ARABIAN OIL CO6
  10. 10IDEMITSU KOSAN CO LTD5
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The data

Filing trends and technology composition

The 233 records in scope span 2015 through the partial-year 2026 cut-off, classified across eight IPC subclasses and filed through six major receiving offices.

A peak in 2018, then a steady pull-back

Filings ran from 7 in 2017 to a peak of 12 in 2018, and by the most recent complete comparison window fell from 3 in 2021 to 1 in 2024 — a 67% decline. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures as understated: publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so recent-year counts will keep rising as more applications publish.

A peak in 2018, then a steady pull-back03691272017122018201920202021202220232024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Refining and catalysis dominate the classification mix

C10G (hydrocarbon oils and refining) appears on 89.7% of the 233 records and B01J (catalytic processes) on 54.1% — expected for a reforming-specific search. The long tail is thin: C07C, C07B, H01M, C01B, G01N and G05B each sit at 9.0% or below, meaning downstream chemistry, analytics and control-system claims are comparatively rare inside this corpus.

Refining and catalysis dominate the classification mixC10G · Hydrocarbon oils & refining20989.7%B01J · Chemical/physical processes & …12654.1%C07C · Acyclic & carbocyclic compounds219.0%C07B · General organic chemistry meth…104.3%H01M · Batteries, cells & fuel cells104.3%C01B · Non-metallic elements & inorga…31.3%G01N · Material analysis & testing31.3%G05B · Control & regulating systems31.3%Other156.4%

Shares are the percentage of the 233 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about continuous catalyst regeneration reforming and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key patents

The most-cited records in this corpus

Representative filing
US4440628A1984-04-03

US4440628A — Catalytic reforming process (Exxon Research and Engineering, 1984)

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY A DE CORP

A series of reforming reactors is loaded with catalyst of graded rhenium content: rearward zones carry a high-rhenium platinum-rhenium catalyst, while the forwardmost zone carries platinum or a low-rhenium platinum-rhenium catalyst. The patent specifies that a substantial share of the rearward-most reactors — from roughly 40 to 90 percent, potentially all of them — should run this high-rhenium loading.Filed 1984; still one of the most-cited records in this dataset, underscoring how much current CCR practice traces back to graded-catalyst reactor design.

View full filing
Highest-cited patents by citation count
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US6605566B2Supported bimetallic catalyst with a strong interaction between a group VIII metal and tin, and its use in a …105
2US5935415AContinuous catalytic reforming process with dual zones87
3US5885439ACatalytic reforming process with multiple zones60
4US5358631ADehydrocyclization or catalytic reforming using sulfur tolerant zeolite catalyst49
5US5565090AModified riser-reactor reforming process46
6US6419820B1Catalytic reforming process employing a selective bifunctional multigradient multimetallic catalyst44
7US5169813ADehydrocyclization or catalytic reforming sulfur tolerant zeolite catalyst40
8US20190101907A1Remote Monitoring of Chloride Treaters Using a Process Simulator Based Chloride Distribution Estimate37
9US5562817AReforming using a Pt/Re catalyst37
10US4440626ACatalytic reforming process37

Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate references — read them as a signal of foundational influence, not of current commercial relevance.

Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis

 
Where to run it
Fastest

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 →
For builders

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 →
Insights

What the numbers mean for a filing or freedom-to-operate decision

Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the classification mix are read together.

Concentration
67.8% / 83.3%
share held by top 5 / top 10 of 233 records

A small group of licensors controls most of the claim space

Five assignees account for 158 of the 233 records in scope, and ten account for 194. Freedom-to-operate work in CCR reforming realistically means clearing a short list of legacy refining and licensing companies, not a broad field of independent filers.

Top 5 combined: 158 records
Momentum
-67%
filings, 2021 to 2024

Filing has slowed from its 2018 peak

Activity peaked at 12 filings in 2018 and had fallen to 1 by 2024, a 67% drop across the 2021-2024 window. That reads as a mature, claim-saturated core rather than a growth phase — new entrants are more likely to find room at the edges than in core catalyst-loading claims.

Peak year: 2018 (12 filings)
Classification mix
89.7%
of 233 records classed under C10G

Almost all activity sits inside core refining chemistry

C10G and B01J together dominate the corpus, while control-systems class G05B and analytics class G01N each sit at only 1.3% of records. Digital monitoring and control-loop claims around chloride balance or coke burn are technically adjacent but sparsely claimed in this dataset.

G05B, G01N: 3 records each
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to continuous catalyst regeneration reforming, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players

Who holds the ground, and where the edges are open

The ranked leader holds 98 records, more than the next four combined, and momentum data shows the largest legacy filers posting zero filings in the latest year — consistent with a field where the core claim space was staked out years ago.

Leader
98
records

One assignee dominates the ranking outright

The top-ranked assignee holds 98 of the 233 records in scope, well ahead of fifth place at 12 and tenth place at 5. That gap defines the field: licensing incumbents, not challengers, set the terms of core catalyst and reactor-zone claims.

42 companies ranked in total
Long tail
42
ranked assignees

A steep drop-off after the top ten

Combined, the top ten hold 83.3% of all 233 records, leaving the remaining 32 ranked assignees to share the balance. Most of that tail consists of single- or few-filing entrants working narrow variations on catalyst formulation or reactor internals.

Top 10 combined: 194 records
Momentum
0
latest-year filings, leading assignees

Legacy leaders have gone quiet in the most recent year

Several of the largest historical filers show zero filings in the latest year, including the top-ranked assignee. Read this alongside the publication lag: some of that may still fill in, but combined with the 2021-2024 decline it points to a slower filing cadence from the incumbents rather than continued aggressive claiming.

Publication lag ~18 months
🔍
Under-claimed adjacent branches
Sub-areas with thin coverage relative to the core reforming claims — worth checking before assuming the space is occupied.
Real-time chloride balance sensingCoke burn control algorithmsReactor pressure-drop diagnosticsCatalyst circulation rate optimisationRegeneration zone temperature profiling
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
UOP LLC0-100%
Chevron Chemical Company LLC0
ExxonMobil Technology & Engineering Co.0
Chevron Research & Technology Co.0
IFP Energies Nouvelles0
Mobil Oil Corp.0
Amoco Corp.0
Saudi Arabian Oil Co.0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next

Where to take this analysis

The ranking and trend tables above answer who and how much. Two follow-up questions matter more for a filing decision: whether a specific claim is already blocked, and whether the under-claimed branches identified here actually hold up on closer reading.

Run a freedom-to-operate check against the top holders

With 67.8% of records held by five assignees, a targeted FTO search against just those portfolios will clear most of the risk before a broader search is needed.

Check claims in Eureka →

Pressure-test the white-space branches

Control-systems and analytics classes sit under 1.5% of records each — confirm that gap is real for your specific claim language, not an artefact of the search string.

Explore white space in Eureka →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about CCR reforming patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Continuous Catalyst Regeneration Reforming in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole continuous catalyst regeneration reforming corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.