Continuous Crystallization Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The top 5 assignees hold 60.7% of all 112 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 85.7% – a field where a handful of filers set the terms.
- Pharma and separations overlap heavily. B01D separation processes (26.8% of records) and A61K medicinal preparations (25.9%) are the two largest classes, showing this is as much a drug-substance purification story as a process-engineering one.
- Filing has plateaued, not grown. 2021 and 2024 both sit at 2 filings for the leader cohort tracked, a flat 0% span, after a peak of 23 records in 2022 – recent years are still filling in under publication lag.
Filing growth compares 2021 (2 records) with 2024 (2) — 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 112 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Continuous crystallization replaces batch crystallizers with steady-state operation – most often mixed-suspension mixed-product-removal (MSMPR) units run in series or oscillatory baffled crystallizers – paired with process analytical technology (PAT) that watches the crystallizing slurry in real time. The monitoring side leans on focused beam reflectance measurement (FBRM) and in-line Raman probes to track particle size distribution and polymorph form as the process runs, with recurring engineering problems around probe fouling and startup transients before the system reaches yield consistency.
The dataset spans 112 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from a search string that pairs continuous-crystallization hardware terms with PAT monitoring terms. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years understate real filing activity and should be read as provisional.
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 112-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
A 2022 peak, then a plateau
Filings rose from 2 in 2017 to a peak of 23 in 2022. The leader cohort tracked from 2021 to 2024 shows 2 filings in both years – flat, 0% growth over that span – and the 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete under normal publication lag, so they should not be read as a decline.
Separations and medicinal preparations lead
B01D (separation processes) covers 26.8% of the 112 records and A61K (medicinal preparations) covers 25.9%, followed by B01J (catalysis and physical processes) at 19.6% and C07D (heterocyclic compounds) at 18.8%. C01D (alkali-metal compounds), C25B (electrolytic production), C07C and C13B (sugar refining) each appear in a smaller but still notable slice, reflecting how many different industries route product finishing through a continuous crystallizer. Records can carry more than one class, so these shares add up to more than the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 112 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Continuous Crystallization and PAT Monitoring with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about continuous crystallization and pat monitoring and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a representative filing
US20210332021A1 – Process and salts for the preparation of 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid
The invention is directed to a method for the preparation, in particular the purification, of 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid or a salt thereof, comprising crystallization of a 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid mono salt and then crystallizing 2,5-furandicarboxylic diacid from this mono salt. The method is at least partially carried out in a continuous or semi-continuous manner, preferably in one or more continuous MSMPR crystallizers in series.Filed by TNO (Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research), 2021-10-28.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5314506A | Crystallization method to improve crystal structure and size | 321 |
| 2 | US20090087492A1 | Processes and Apparatuses for the Production of Crystalline Organic Microparticle Compositions by Micro-Milli… | 73 |
| 3 | EP0461930A1 | A crystallization method to improve crystal structure and size | 50 |
| 4 | US20120111117A1 | Ultrasonic method of monitoring particle size distribution of a medium | 26 |
| 5 | US5663456A | Method for obtaining large crystals with high purity by destructing part of fines in slurry in a crystallizer | 25 |
| 6 | CN104174181A | 一种有机合成料液的分离纯化系统及分离纯化方法 | 15 |
| 7 | JP1992231960A | Crystallization for improving structure and size of crystal | 14 |
| 8 | US11339481B1 | Production of lithium hydroxide and lithium carbonate | 13 |
| 9 | US20170312795A1 | Systems with Anti-fouling control and methods for controlling fouling within a channel of a plug flow crystal… | 13 |
| 10 | US4183729A | Apparatus and method for determining crystallization properties of urine | 13 |
Citation counts accumulate over time and favour older filings; they signal influence within this searched corpus, not present-day importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-throughs of the concentration, class and citation data above.
A small group sets the claim terms
The top 5 assignees hold 60.7% of all 112 records in scope and the top 10 hold 85.7%. That leaves a long tail of single- or low-filing entrants competing for the remaining space – a new entrant's freedom to operate depends heavily on which of the leading assignees' claims sit closest to their process route.
Separations and pharma claims overlap
B01D (separation processes) and A61K (medicinal preparations) are nearly tied as the largest classes, ahead of B01J catalysis and C07D heterocyclic chemistry. That overlap means a purification-focused filing in this space is likely to sit near both a chemical-engineering prior art base and a pharmaceutical one.
Growth has flattened after the 2022 peak
Filing activity peaked at 23 records in 2022, and the leader cohort's filings held flat between 2021 and 2024 at 0% change. Combined with publication lag, this reads as a market that has already staked its major claims rather than one still accelerating.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to continuous crystallization and pat monitoring, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee concentration and where the gaps sit
The 36-company ranking is dominated by a handful of large filers spanning pharma, industrial chemicals and applied research institutes, with recent-year activity across the tracked leaders showing no new filings in the latest year – consistent with the plateau seen in the trend data.
One filer well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 20 of the 112 records, roughly triple the fifth-place holder's 7 – a gap wide enough that its portfolio is worth a dedicated freedom-to-operate review before committing to a similar process route.
A fast drop-off after the leader
Fifth place holds 7 records and tenth place holds 4 – the ranking thins quickly outside the top few, meaning most of the 36 ranked companies are single- or low-filing entrants rather than repeat filers.
US-first filing with strong EPO and PCT follow-through
The United States receives the largest share of filings at 38, ahead of the EPO at 21 and WIPO/PCT at 19, with Australia, Canada and India each in single digits. That pattern points to US-anchored R&D with deliberate European and international-phase coverage rather than purely domestic filing.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Lithium Ark Holding B.V. | 0 | — |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 0 | — |
| Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) | 0 | — |
| Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. | 0 | — |
| Merck & Co., Inc. | 0 | — |
| University of Western Ontario | 0 | — |
| Saudi Arabian Oil Co. | 0 | — |
| Amgen Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to a field with its major claims already staked by a small leader group, but with specific engineering sub-problems still open.
Map freedom to operate against the leader's 20 records
Before committing to an MSMPR or oscillatory baffled design, check how closely a target process route sits to the top-ranked assignee's claim set, given its outsized share of the 112 records.
Explore the assignee portfolio in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for a first-filer position
Probe-fouling mitigation and startup-transient control show up as thin relative to the core crystallizer hardware claims – worth a validation search before drafting.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
One assignee leads the 36-company ranking with 20 of the 112 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 7 and the tenth-place holder at 4. The top 5 assignees combined hold 60.7% of all records and the top 10 hold 85.7%, so filing activity is concentrated in a small group rather than spread evenly. Anyone entering this space should treat the leader's portfolio as the first stop for a freedom-to-operate check, since its share is roughly three times that of the next few filers combined.
Filing peaked at 23 records in 2022 and has since flattened: the leader cohort tracked from 2021 to 2024 shows 2 filings in both years, a 0% change over that span. Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as a real decline. On the evidence available, the field looks like it has plateaued after its major claims were staked around 2022 rather than one still accelerating.
MSMPR stands for mixed-suspension mixed-product-removal, a continuous crystallizer design run at steady state rather than in batches, often configured in series. It appears repeatedly in this dataset's search terms and in representative filings such as US20210332021A1, which purifies 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid through a continuous MSMPR train. Recognizing MSMPR language in a claim is important because it signals the applicant is claiming the continuous-operation mode itself, not just the chemistry being crystallized.
The IPC composition shows this is not a single-industry field: B01D separation processes cover 26.8% of the 112 records and A61K medicinal preparations cover 25.9%, with B01J catalysis, C07D heterocyclic compounds, C01D alkali-metal compounds and C25B electrolytic production all appearing as well. That spread means pharmaceutical purification, industrial chemical separation and even sugar refining (C13B) all route through continuous crystallizer and PAT claims. A record can carry more than one class, so a single filing often sits across two or more of these industries at once.
Relative to the dense core claims around MSMPR hardware and FBRM particle-size monitoring, sub-areas like probe-fouling mitigation, startup-transient control algorithms and oscillatory baffled crystallizer scale-up show thinner filing density in this dataset. In-line Raman claims specifically aimed at polymorph discrimination, and continuous crystallization applied to sugar refining, also look less crowded than the pharmaceutical and separations core. These are reasonable places to search further before drafting a first claim, though thin filing density should be confirmed with a dedicated search rather than assumed from category counts alone.
Research Continuous Crystallization and PAT Monitoring in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole continuous crystallization and pat monitoring 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.