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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/digital-batch-records-and-data-integrity-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Bioprocess Scale-UpDigital Batch Records and Data Integrity Patents: Who Files, and What They Claim
- 27.7% of all 3,577 records sit with just five assignees, but the tenth-ranked filer holds only 52 records — a steep drop from a leader with 431.
- Filing grew 14% from 2021 to 2024 (121 to 138 records), the last span the data can treat as complete before publication lag thins out 2025-2026.
- G06F digital data processing covers 65.5% of records, while review-by-exception and equipment-interface claims remain comparatively thin — the likely white space.
3,577
Published Records
28%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+14%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (121 records) with 2024 (138) — 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 3,577 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What this patent set covers
This landscape tracks patent filings at the intersection of electronic batch records, audit trail review and data integrity with the systems that support them: validation, workflow digitization, exception handling and equipment interfacing. The search spans 2015 through the July 2026 data cut-off and returns 3,577 published records, each represented once in the assignee ranking as a distinct patent family.
Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, the technology composition below sums to more than 100% of the record total — that overlap itself is informative, showing how tightly data-processing claims (G06F) are bundled with transmission (H04L) and business-process (G06Q) claims in this space.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity 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
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers
Filing trend and technical composition
Two views of the same 3,577 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 223 in 2017 to a peak of 247 in 2025, with 2021-2024 the last complete window showing +14% growth (121 to 138 records). 2025 and 2026 figures will continue to rise as publication catches up with filing, so treat the tail of the trend as a floor, not a ceiling.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
G06F (electric digital data processing) anchors 65.5% of records, with H04L (digital information transmission, 23.6%) and G06Q (business/commerce data processing, 16.8%) the next-largest overlapping classes. Narrower classes — G11B information storage at 3.3% and H04Q switching at 3.0% — mark the edges of where claim density falls off.
Shares are the percentage of the 3,577 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 Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about digital batch records and data integrity and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Representative filing and most-cited prior art
Representative Recent Filing
Monitoring quality of pharmaceutical manufacturing sites (US20250364145A1)
PIRAMAL PHARMA LIMITED
The filing describes a method for quantitatively evaluating the quality health of pharmaceutical manufacturing sites, measuring audit readiness, data integrity compliance and overall operational performance.Filed by Piramal Pharma Limited, published 2025-11-27 — one of the most recent entries in this dataset, illustrating the shift from record-keeping mechanics toward site-level quality scoring built on top of data integrity metrics.
Most-cited records in this search
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6850252B1 | Intelligent electronic appliance system and method | 4,058 |
| 2 | US6519571B1 | Dynamic customer profile management | 2,371 |
| 3 | US6571282B1 | Block-based communication in a communication services patterns environment | 2,352 |
| 4 | US6400996B1 | Adaptive pattern recognition based control system and method | 2,342 |
| 5 | US6601233B1 | Business components framework | 1,859 |
| 6 | US6473794B1 | System for establishing plan to test components of web based framework by displaying pictorial representation… | 1,732 |
| 7 | US7100195B1 | Managing user information on an e-commerce system | 1,647 |
| 8 | US6640145B2 | Media recording device with packet data interface | 1,590 |
| 9 | US6289382B1 | System, method and article of manufacture for a globally addressable interface in a communication services pa… | 1,527 |
| 10 | US20030058277A1 | A view configurer in a presentation services patterns enviroment | 1,472 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
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 Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity 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
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 filing pattern signals
Three findings that shape where to file next and who to watch.
Concentration
27.7%
of 3,577 records held by top 5
A leader well ahead of a long tail
The leading assignee holds 431 records against 112 for the fifth-ranked and 52 for the tenth. That gap between the top and the rest of the ranked 100 companies means the field is not a settled duopoly — it is one entrenched filer surrounded by many mid-size and single-filing entrants still staking claims.
Based on the full 100-company ranking
Growth
+14%
2021 to 2024 filing growth
Steady, not explosive, expansion
Filing volume moved from 121 records in 2021 to 138 in 2024 — real growth, but not a land rush. Combined with a 2025 peak of 247 total records (still filling in under publication lag), the field looks like one still accumulating claims rather than one that has plateaued.
2024 is the last complete comparison year
Overlap
23.6%
of records also carry H04L transmission claims
Data integrity claims rarely stand alone
Most filings in G06F pair with transmission (H04L) or business-process (G06Q) classes, meaning a workable claim in this space typically has to address how records move and how they support a business workflow, not just how they are stored or validated.
Class shares sum above 100% by design
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 digital batch records and data integrity, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity 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 is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked 100 companies span large diversified technology filers and a long tail of single- or few-record entrants; recent-year momentum for several historically strong filers has gone flat.
Leader
431
records held
One filer well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee's 431 records dwarf the fifth-place total of 112, and several of the largest historical filers show zero filings in the latest tracked year — a signal that the leaderboard reflects accumulated portfolio strength more than current-year activity.
Momentum data shows several leaders at 0 YoY
Mid-tier
52
records at 10th place
A crowded middle tier
Between the top 5 (991 records combined) and the tenth-ranked filer's 52 records sits a wide band of assignees each holding a modest but non-trivial slice — the segment most likely to include companies still deciding how aggressively to expand their filing.
38.4% of all records sit with the top 10
Collaboration
10
co-assignee pairs identified
Filing is mostly solo, not joint
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, the strongest linking related corporate entities within the same group rather than independent companies — suggesting cross-company joint filing is not yet a common strategy in this field.
Strongest pair: 14 shared records
Recent-year momentum among historical leaders
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Corp | 0 | -100% |
| Accenture LLP | 0 | — |
| International Business Machines Corporation | 0 | — |
| Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC | 0 | — |
| DiscoVision Associates | 0 | — |
| Seiko Epson Corp | 0 | — |
| AT&T Mobility II LLC | 0 | — |
| Somos Inc | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity 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 dataset points to specific next steps for teams deciding where to file or where risk sits.
Map claim scope against the leader's 431-record portfolio
Before filing near the core G06F/H04L cluster, check how the top-ranked assignee's claims are structured — its volume alone means overlap risk is highest there.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest draft claims against the under-claimed branches
Review-by-exception and equipment-interface sub-areas show thinner density; a claim search there before drafting can confirm whether the white space is real or already crowded informally.
Run a claim novelty check in EurekaWatch the 2025-2026 filings as they complete
Publication lag means the most recent two years understate true filing activity; revisit the trend once 2025 records finish populating.
Set up filing alerts in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity 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 this landscape
One assignee leads the ranked field with 431 records, well ahead of the fifth-placed filer at 112 and the tenth at 52. That gap suggests the leader has built a broad defensive portfolio over time rather than the field being evenly split among a handful of comparable competitors. Because the ranking counts patent families, this reflects sustained filing activity rather than a single large application family being double-counted.
Filing grew from 121 records in 2021 to 138 in 2024, a 14% increase over that three-year span, which is the last period the data can treat as complete. Later years (2025-2026) show lower counts, but that is expected: patent publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so those figures will keep rising as more applications publish. Peak filing so far was 247 records in 2025, itself likely to be revised upward.
Electric digital data processing (IPC class G06F) appears in 65.5% of the 3,577 records in scope, making it the dominant technical category by a wide margin. Digital information transmission (H04L, 23.6%) and business/commerce data processing (G06Q, 16.8%) are the next most common, and most records carrying one of these secondary classes also carry G06F — meaning claims in this field rarely address storage or validation in isolation from how records move or support a workflow.
Narrower IPC classes such as information storage (G11B, 3.3% of records) and switching/selecting (H04Q, 3.0%) show much thinner claim density than the core G06F cluster, as do functional areas like review-by-exception workflows and equipment-interface data mapping. These are not guaranteed to be open — thin published claim counts can also mean the area is handled through trade secret or non-patent protection — but they warrant a closer novelty check before assuming the space is crowded.
Rarely. The dataset identifies only 10 co-assignee pairs across all 3,577 records, and the strongest of these link related entities within the same corporate group rather than separate competing companies. For a team evaluating partnership or joint-filing strategy, this suggests solo filing is the prevailing norm in digital batch record and data integrity patents, at least among the assignees captured here.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity 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 Digital Batch Records and Data Integrity in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole digital batch records and data integrity 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.