Detergent Protease Engineering Patents: Who Leads, Gaps 2026
- Filing peaked in 2017 at 18 records and has not returned to that level since; the 2021-2024 window is flat at 0% growth, though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in as publication lags filing by roughly 18 months.
- One assignee sits well clear of the field with 87 records against a fifth-place count of 41 and a tenth-place count of 26 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one.
- Genetic-engineering claims outnumber formulation claims C12N (microorganisms & genetic engineering) carries 401 records versus 254 for C11D (detergents & cleaning compositions), showing the contested ground has shifted upstream to the enzyme itself.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (3) — 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.
What detergent protease engineering patents actually cover
Detergent protease engineering sits at the intersection of protein science and formulation chemistry: patents in this set claim enzyme variants engineered for thermostability, surfactant tolerance and bleach stability, alongside the expression systems used to produce them at scale and the dosage or delivery approaches that let them survive a wash cycle. The search set spans 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off and draws on 52 published families ranked across 100 assignees — the full ranking the dataset returns, not a curated top tier.
Because the field blends molecular biology with consumer-product formulation, records classify across genetic engineering, fermentation and cleaning-composition codes at once. That spread matters for freedom-to-operate work: a formulation team clearing C11D claims can still walk into a C12N-classified variant patent covering the same enzyme.
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 52-family dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim volume.
A 2017 peak, then a plateau
Filing hit 18 records in 2017, the high point of the window, then settled into a lower and flatter pattern. The evidence pins 2021 and 2024 at the same count of 3 records — 0% growth across that three-year span — making this a maturing filing rhythm rather than an expanding one. Treat 2025 and 2026 counts as provisional; publication lag means recent filings have not all surfaced yet.
Genetic engineering outweighs formulation
C12N (microorganisms & genetic engineering) leads at 401 records, ahead of C11D (detergents & cleaning compositions) at 254 and C12P (fermentation & enzymatic synthesis) at 108. Smaller but present are A23L (foods), C12R (microorganism indexing), C07K (peptides & proteins), C07H (sugars & nucleic acids) and A61K (medicinal preparations) — evidence that protease variants engineered here also get positioned for food and pharma use.
Shares are the percentage of 1,605 class assignments (one record can carry several), not of the record count.
Go deeper on Detergent Protease Engineering with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about detergent protease engineering and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records other filings had to design around
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO1992017577A1 | Novel proteases | 416 |
| 2 | WO2010056640A2 | Compositions and methods comprising serine protease variants | 354 |
| 3 | WO2009149200A2 | Compositions and methods comprising variant microbial proteases | 314 |
| 4 | US5902781A | Bleach catalyst plus enzyme particles | 177 |
| 5 | US5336611A | PB92 serine protease muteins and their use in detergents | 167 |
| 6 | WO1995002675A1 | A detergent composition comprising two cellulase components | 145 |
| 7 | US20060259995A1 | Proteases, nucleic acids encoding them and methods for making and using them | 138 |
| 8 | WO2005032496A2 | Hydrolases, nucleic acids encoding them and mehods for making and using them | 121 |
| 9 | EP0328229A1 | Novel proteolytic enzymes and their use in detergents | 118 |
| 10 | WO2008153925A2 | Methods for improving multiple protein properties | 101 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — read this as a signal of influence on the field, not 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 filing pattern signals for R&D and IP planning
Three read-throughs from the trend, class composition and citation data that matter for teams deciding where to file next.
The field has cooled from its 2017 high
Filing dropped from a peak of 18 records in 2017 to 3 in both 2021 and 2024 — flat across that span rather than accelerating or collapsing. That plateau suggests the core enzyme-variant claim space is largely staked out, with new filings maintaining position rather than expanding into fresh territory.
Claims cluster upstream of the wash cycle
More records classify under microorganism and genetic-engineering codes (C12N) than under detergent-composition codes (C11D). Competitive pressure sits more on the enzyme sequence and expression system than on the surfactant formulation around it.
A small set of older grants still anchors the field
The five most-cited records span from 1992 to 2010, and the top three are all separated by a wide citation margin from typical filings in this set. New entrants should check these specific families before assuming a variant is clear to file.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to detergent protease engineering, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it thins out
The assignee ranking runs to 100 companies, but the count drops sharply after the leader — a shape that says less about market share than about who has staked repeat claims.
One filer dominates the ranked leaders
The top-ranked assignee holds 87 records, more than double the fifth-place count of 41. That gap is wide enough that any new filer entering this space should expect to be measured against one incumbent's portfolio first.
A real second tier, then a long tail
Fifth place sits at 41 records and tenth place at 26 — still substantial positions, not incidental filings. Below that the ranking extends to 100 assignees, most holding far smaller counts.
Co-filing is concentrated, not widespread
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pairing recorded at a count of 10 shared families. That level of repeat co-filing points to a small number of longstanding commercial partnerships rather than broad industry collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Genencor International | 0 | — |
| Novozymes A/S | 0 | -100% |
| Danisco US Inc. | 0 | — |
| Novo Nordisk A/S | 0 | — |
| Genencor International | 0 | — |
| Verenium Corp | 0 | — |
| Procter & Gamble Co | 0 | — |
| DSM IP Assets B.V. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The trend and ranking data point to specific next steps depending on whether you are clearing claims or planning where to file.
Check freedom-to-operate against the citation anchors
Before advancing a new protease variant, verify the current legal status of the highest-cited records in this set — several remain influential reference points despite their age.
Explore the citation networkTrack the leader's recent filings directly
With one assignee holding 87 records against a fifth-place count of 41, monitoring that portfolio's newest publications is more informative than watching the field broadly.
Set up assignee trackingProbe the under-claimed branches before formulating there
Sub-areas like cold-water surfactant tolerance and non-Bacillus expression hosts show thinner claim density — worth a scoped search before committing R&D time.
Run a white-space searchCommon questions on detergent protease patents
One assignee leads the ranked list with 87 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 41 and the tenth-place holder at 26. That is a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one, meaning the leader's portfolio is worth checking first in any freedom-to-operate review. The ranking covers 100 assignees in total, so a long tail of smaller filers sits below these leaders.
Filing peaked at 18 records in 2017 and has not returned to that level; the period from 2021 to 2024 is flat at 0% growth. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so it is too early to call the recent years a decline. The honest read is a plateau following an earlier peak, not an active slowdown.
The largest concentration of records classifies under C12N, covering microorganisms and genetic engineering — ahead of C11D, the detergent and cleaning-composition class. That means more competitive claim pressure sits on the enzyme variant itself, its stability engineering and its expression system, than on the surfactant formulation it goes into. Smaller but present clusters in food (A23L) and pharmaceutical (A61K) classes show some enzyme variants get positioned for cross-use beyond laundry detergent.
The most-cited record in this dataset is WO1992017577A1, covering novel proteases, with 416 citations, followed by WO2010056640A2 and WO2009149200A2, both covering serine protease and microbial protease variants. High citation counts inside a searched patent corpus tend to favour older filings simply because they have had more years to accumulate citations, so treat this as a measure of influence on later filings rather than a signal that the claims are still commercially central today. Anyone designing a new variant should still check these families' current legal status before assuming freedom to operate.
Based on the classification spread, thinner claim density shows up around cold-water surfactant-tolerant variants, expression-yield optimisation in non-Bacillus production hosts, and low-dosage encapsulated delivery formats. These sit adjacent to the dense core of variant-engineering and formulation claims rather than inside it. A scoped prior-art search on any of these narrower branches is a reasonable next step before committing R&D resources there.
Research Detergent Protease Engineering in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole detergent protease engineering 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.