Drinking-Water Treatment Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Filing is fragmented, not consolidated. the top 5 assignees together hold only 8.2% of the 3,980 records in scope, and the top 10 just 13.2% — no single filer controls the field.
- Separation and treatment claims dominate the IPC mix. C02F water/wastewater treatment appears on 71.9% of records and B01D separation processes on 28.0%, while G06Q-classed monitoring/data claims sit at just 1.8%.
- Filings cooled slightly after a 2021 peak. activity ran from 171 records in 2021 to 138 in 2024, a 19% pullback over that three-year span, before the still-incomplete most recent years.
Filing growth compares 2021 (171 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 3,980 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This review covers 3,980 published patent records matched against drinking-water and potable-water treatment terms combined with contaminant, membrane and oxidation-process language, filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off. The scope spans filtration and membrane hardware, chemical and electrochemical oxidation routes, and the monitoring instrumentation used to verify treatment efficiency and water quality. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the last one to two years in any trend chart will always look thinner than the years before them.
The picture that emerges is a broad, technically diverse field with no dominant gatekeeper. Filing offices split across the United States, WIPO's PCT route, China, Europe, India and Australia, and the assignee ranking runs long rather than steep — a signal that claim space is still open to new entrants willing to work a specific sub-problem rather than the whole treatment stack.
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 3,980-record dataset: filing activity by year, and the IPC subclasses those records fall under. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, the class shares below add up to more than 100% of the record total.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 162 records in 2017 to a peak of 171 in 2021, then eased to 138 by 2024 — a 19% decline across that three-year window. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures (29 in the latest partial year) as undercounts still filling in from the publication lag, not as evidence the field is contracting further.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C02F (water and wastewater treatment) anchors the field at 71.9% of records, with B01D (separation processes, including membrane filtration) close behind at 28.0%. Analytical and monitoring classes — G01N at 10.1%, G06Q at just 1.8% — are comparatively thin, which is where instrumentation and data-driven treatment-efficiency claims still have room to grow.
Shares are the percentage of the 3,980 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Drinking-Water Treatment Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about drinking-water treatment patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
US20030132167A1 — Potable water treatment system, apparatus and method of operation thereof
A potable water treatment system and apparatus for purifying and treating potable water transferred from a source to end users via a water line. The system combines a filter capable of reducing turbidity to below 0.10 NTU while removing TOC and disinfection by-products, together with a chemical feed system that measures water flow and water quality and proportions chemical additives accordingly.Filed by ClearValue Technologies, this filing bundles a specific filtration performance threshold with an automated, measurement-driven dosing loop — the combination is the part worth checking before building a similar feed-control system.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160069743A1 | Spectral imaging system for remote and noninvasive detection of target substances using spectral filter array… | 299 |
| 2 | US20100332149A1 | Method and system for remote monitoring of fluid quality and treatment | 240 |
| 3 | US20110024361A1 | Aqueous treatment apparatus utilizing precursor materials and ultrasonics to generate customized oxidation-re… | 238 |
| 4 | US20070108056A1 | Electrochemical ion exchange treatment of fluids | 171 |
| 5 | US5059317A | Transportable apparatus for producing drinking water | 171 |
| 6 | US6954701B2 | Method for remote monitoring of water treatment systems | 167 |
| 7 | US20100237254A1 | Fluid treatment apparatus comprising ultraviolet light emitting diode | 163 |
| 8 | US20090084734A1 | Ultraviolet water purification system | 156 |
| 9 | US6560543B2 | Method for monitoring a public water treatment system | 152 |
| 10 | US5369072A | Granular media for removing contaminants from water and methods for making the same | 142 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — read them as a signal of influence on later work, not as a ranking of current commercial relevance.
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 tells you
Three read-throughs from the concentration, technology-mix and geographic-filing data that matter for deciding where to file and where competitive risk actually sits.
No single assignee controls the field
The leading assignee holds 78 records and the tenth-ranked holder 38, out of a 100-company ranking. Even combined, the top 5 account for only 8.2% of all 3,980 records in scope and the top 10 for 13.2% — a long tail of moderate filers rather than a consolidated core.
Treatment chemistry is crowded; data/monitoring claims are not
Water and wastewater treatment (C02F) and separation processes (B01D) cover the large majority of records, at 71.9% and 28.0% respectively. Business/data-processing classifications (G06Q) sit at only 1.8% of records, well below where treatment-efficiency monitoring and remote-verification claims could plausibly extend.
Filing is US-anchored but genuinely multi-jurisdictional
The United States receives the largest single share of filings at 1,106, followed by the WIPO PCT route at 428, China at 415, Europe at 407, India at 282 and Australia at 227. That spread suggests treatment technology is being protected across multiple regional markets rather than defended from one home jurisdiction alone.
Peak filing has passed but the field has not gone quiet
2021 was the peak year at 171 records; by 2024, the last year treatable as complete, filings had eased to 138 — a 19% pullback. That is a cooling from peak, not a collapse, and several of the largest-ranked assignees show zero activity in the latest year, consistent with a maturing but still-active field rather than an abandoned one.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to drinking-water treatment patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the claim space is still open
The assignee ranking runs long: a handful of names hold moderate positions, but most of the 100 ranked companies sit well below the leader's 78 records. That pattern, paired with the thin monitoring and data-processing classes, points to specific sub-areas where a well-drafted first claim still has room to stand.
The leader is well ahead of fifth place, but still a minority holder
The top-ranked assignee holds 78 records against 53 for fifth place and 38 for tenth — a real gap at the very top, but nowhere near enough to dominate a 3,980-record field. Most of the 100 ranked companies file well below double digits.
Collaboration is rare and concentrated in a few relationships
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest linking a university research group to a specialist materials company, and another linking two entities within the same consumer-goods group. Most filers act alone rather than through joint ownership.
Some historically active filers have gone quiet recently
Several of the assignees with the largest cumulative record counts show zero filings in the most recent year, which given the 18-month publication lag may reflect filings still in the pipeline rather than a genuine stop — but it is worth checking directly before assuming continued activity.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Crystal Lagoons (Curacao) BV | 0 | — |
| Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation | 0 | — |
| Water Standard Co LLC | 0 | — |
| Hach | 0 | — |
| Trojan Technologies Inc | 0 | — |
| LYNN DANIEL W | 0 | — |
| Unilever NV | 0 | — |
| Aquaporin A/S | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the question is freedom-to-operate, whitespace scouting, or tracking a named competitor.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on a specific dosing or filtration claim
Concentration figures show no single blocking assignee, but individual claims — like the automated chemical-feed dosing loop in the representative filing above — still need a targeted clearance search before building a similar system.
Explore claims in Eureka →Watch the monitoring and data-processing gap
G06Q-classed filings sit at only 1.8% of records against a 71.9% base in core treatment classes, which is a wide enough gap to warrant tracking who files there next.
Set up monitoring in Eureka →Verify recent-year quiet filers before assuming exit
Several top-ranked assignees show zero filings in the latest year; given the ~18-month publication lag, confirm via direct search whether that reflects a real pullback or filings still working through the pipeline.
Check assignee activity in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The assignee ranking for this dataset covers 100 companies, and it runs long rather than steep: the leader holds 78 records, fifth place 53, and tenth place 38. Combined, the top 5 assignees account for only 8.2% of the 3,980 records in scope, and the top 10 for 13.2%. That means no single company controls the field, and a competitive-intelligence exercise needs to track a broad set of moderate filers rather than one or two dominant players.
Filing peaked in 2021 at 171 records and eased to 138 by 2024, a 19% decline over that three-year span — the last span that can be treated as complete. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look lower still, but that is expected: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent years are always undercounted at the point of measurement. Read the trend as a cooling from a 2021 peak, not as a field going quiet.
Water and wastewater treatment processes classified under C02F appear on 71.9% of the 3,980 records, and separation processes including membrane filtration (B01D) on 28.0%. Material analysis and testing (G01N) covers 10.1%, and business/data-processing claims (G06Q) just 1.8%. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these figures add up to more than 100%, but the gap between the core treatment classes and the thinner monitoring/data classes is a useful signal of where claim space remains open.
The United States is the largest single receiving office in this dataset at 1,106 filings, followed by the WIPO PCT route at 428, China at 415, Europe at 407, India at 282, and Australia at 227. This spread indicates that treatment technology is being protected in multiple regional markets simultaneously rather than concentrated behind a single home jurisdiction, which matters for anyone planning a multi-market filing or clearance strategy.
The most-cited records in this dataset include filings on remote fluid-quality monitoring, electrochemical oxidation-reduction treatment cells, and electrochemical ion-exchange treatment of fluids, with citation counts ranging up to 299. High citation counts inside a searched corpus tend to favour older filings that have simply had more time to accumulate citations, so they should be read as a signal of influence on later work rather than a ranking of which technology is most commercially relevant today.
Yes, particularly around monitoring, data analytics and predictive-maintenance claims layered on top of established filtration and oxidation hardware. G06Q-classed filings sit at just 1.8% of the 3,980 records despite the core treatment classes covering the large majority of the dataset, suggesting that data-driven treatment-efficiency verification and remote monitoring integration remain comparatively under-claimed relative to the underlying hardware.
Research Drinking-Water Treatment Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole drinking-water treatment patent landscape 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.