Epoxy Resin Adhesive Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- Filing has already peaked. Annual filings hit 194 in 2019 and have declined since; the 2022 midpoint of 156 confirms a flattening trend rather than a temporary dip.
- Adhesive-specific claims dominate the IPC mix. C09J appears in 2,977 of 3,667 records, well ahead of the underlying C08G and C08L polymer-chemistry classes, showing filers are claiming the bonded application, not just the resin chemistry.
- The most active assignees have gone quiet. Several leading filers, including Dow and 3M entities, show 0% activity in the latest year, while Henkel's filings are down 50% YoY — a sign the field's incumbents have largely staked their claims.
Filing growth compares 2021 (108 records) with 2024 (117) — 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 3,667 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Epoxy resin adhesive formulation sits at the intersection of structural bonding and polymer chemistry. This dataset tracks 3,667 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine epoxy resin terminology with structural-adhesive claim language, filtered to the adhesive and condensation-polymer IPC classes (C09J163, C08L63, C09J11). Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent filing year is always undercounted relative to prior years.
The filter captures formulations claimed as structural adhesives, toughened adhesives or bonding agents rather than epoxy chemistry generally, which keeps the corpus focused on bonded-joint performance claims: toughening phases, cure chemistry, and application-specific additive packages.
Filing trends and technology composition
Annual filing counts and the IPC subclass breakdown, drawn directly from the underlying family set.
Filings rose through the late 2010s, then declined
Filings climbed from 128 in 2017 to a peak of 194 in 2019, held near that level through the 2022 midpoint of 156, and have fallen since — consistent with a field where the core formulation space is now well claimed rather than one still attracting new entrants.
Adhesive-application claims outnumber pure resin-chemistry claims
C09J (adhesives) covers 2,977 records versus 1,951 for C08G (condensation polymers) and 1,628 for C08L (polymer compositions); the smaller B32B, C09D, C08J and C08F counts mark adjacent branches — laminates, coatings, processing and vinyl addition chemistry — where filing density is comparatively light.
Shares are the percentage of the 3,667 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Epoxy Resin Adhesive Formulation with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about epoxy resin adhesive formulation and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art in this space
US5686509A — Epoxy Resin Structural Adhesive Composition
The patent describes an adhesion-reinforcing composition for epoxy resin adhesives built from a core-shell copolymer particle, ion-crosslinked with a mono- or divalent metal cation. The core is a diene-based polymer with a glass transition temperature at or below -30°C; the shell is an acrylate- or methacrylate-based copolymer with a glass transition temperature of at least 70°C, giving the formulation a toughening phase distinct from the epoxy matrix itself.Filed via PCT (WO94/28082) and granted to Ganz Chemical Co., Ltd. in 1997, this record predates most of the corpus and anchors the core-shell toughening approach cited by later filers.
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7125461B2 | Activatable material for sealing, baffling or reinforcing and method of forming same | 264 |
| 2 | US20050070634A1 | Process for applying a streamable epoxy adhesive | 255 |
| 3 | US5290857A | Epoxy resin adhesive composition | 247 |
| 4 | US20040204551A1 | Epoxy/elastomer adduct, method of forming same and materials and articles formed therewith | 237 |
| 5 | US6846559B2 | Activatable material | 230 |
| 6 | US6572971B2 | Structural modified epoxy adhesive compositions | 212 |
| 7 | US20060276601A1 | Toughened epoxy adhesive composition | 204 |
| 8 | US20050209401A1 | Toughened epoxy adhesive composition | 183 |
| 9 | US4739019A | Curable epoxy based compositions having reduced shrinkage during cure | 173 |
| 10 | US5686509A | Epoxy resin structural adhesive composition | 168 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; treat them as a map of foundational art, not current competitive strength.
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 filing strategy
Reading the filing trend and IPC mix together points to a market where the core adhesive claims are settled and the open ground sits in adjacent processing and application branches.
Growth has already turned over
The peak year of 194 filings in 2019 came after 2017's 128, and the 2022 midpoint of 156 shows the field holding rather than accelerating. The latest year's 21 filings understate true activity given the ~18-month publication lag, but the multi-year decline predates that lag effect.
Adhesive-application claims lead resin chemistry
C09J's dominance over C08G and C08L indicates most filers are protecting the bonded-joint use case — cure profile, toughening, substrate adhesion — rather than novel epoxy backbone chemistry, which is comparatively saturated upstream.
Filing is split across three roughly equal blocs
The United States, Europe and China each account for a similar share of receiving-office filings, with Japan close behind at 595. That spread means freedom-to-operate work cannot be limited to a single jurisdiction.
Co-filing is rare and concentrated around individual inventors
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest link — Dow Global Technologies with a named inventor — outweighs the next pairs by a wide margin, suggesting formulation IP here is mostly filed solo rather than through joint development.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to epoxy resin adhesive formulation, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | LUTZ ANDREAS | 23 |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | SCHNEIDER DANIEL | 10 |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company | GORODISHER ILYA | 8 |
| Henkel AG & Co. KGaA | HENKEL (CHINA) CO LTD | 7 |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company | POCIUS ALPHONSUS V | 6 |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company | CAMPBELL CHRISTOPHER J | 6 |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | EAGLE GLENN G | 6 |
| Kaneka Corporation | Kaneka Corporation | 6 |
With only 10 identified co-assignee pairs and the strongest tied to a single inventor relationship at Dow, most epoxy adhesive formulation IP in this set was filed by a sole assignee rather than through cross-company development.
Assignee activity and where it is heading
Recent-year momentum tells a different story from cumulative filing counts: the assignees with the largest historical portfolios are the ones pulling back fastest.
Even active filers are slowing
Henkel logged 4 filings in the latest year but that is down 50% year-on-year, the sharpest decline among assignees still filing at all — a pullback from a name with a substantial historical position in structural adhesives.
Major incumbents show zero latest-year activity
Dow Global Technologies, 3M Innovative Properties and PPG Industries Ohio all show zero filings in the latest year, with 3M and PPG down 100% YoY from the prior period — consistent with mature portfolios rather than continued expansion.
A small group holds steady rather than growing or retreating
Sika Technology shows 1 filing in the latest year at 0% YoY change — modest but stable, distinguishing it from assignees showing sharp declines or complete stoppage.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Henkel AG & Co. KGaA | 4 | -50% |
| Sika Technology AG | 1 | 0% |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company | 0 | -100% |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | 0 | — |
| PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| 3M Company | 0 | — |
| Zephyros, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| The Yokohama Rubber Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with settled core claims and a shrinking pool of active filers. The next steps depend on whether you are clearing a formulation or scouting where to file.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on toughening chemistry
Core-shell and elastomer-adduct toughening approaches carry the heaviest citation weight in this corpus, so any new formulation touching that mechanism should be checked against the most-cited records before drafting claims.
Explore in Eureka →Track the assignees still filing
With most major incumbents at zero latest-year filings, watching the handful still active — rather than the historical leaders — is the more useful signal for where the field moves next.
Explore in Eureka →Look outside the core IPC classes
B32B, C09D, C08J and C08F each carry meaningfully lower filing counts than C09J, C08G and C08L, marking laminate, coating and processing branches worth a closer look for open claim space.
Explore in Eureka →Common questions about epoxy resin adhesive patents
The assignee ranking in this dataset is dominated by a small group of established chemical and industrial adhesive companies, including Dow, 3M, Henkel, PPG and Sika entities. However, cumulative portfolio size does not equal current activity — several of the largest historical filers show zero filings in the latest tracked year, so leadership by volume and leadership by momentum are not the same thing. Anyone assessing competitive position should look at both the ranking table and the recent-year momentum figures together.
No, filing activity has already peaked. Filings rose from 128 in 2017 to a peak of 194 in 2019, held near 156 at the 2022 midpoint, and have declined since, with the latest full year showing only 21. Some of that recent drop reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication, but the multi-year downward trend predates that lag effect, indicating the core formulation space is increasingly settled rather than expanding.
This landscape is built on three core IPC codes: C09J163 (epoxy resin adhesives), C08L63 (compositions of epoxy resins) and C09J11 (adhesive compositions generally). Within the resulting corpus, records also fall under adjacent classes including C08G for condensation polymer chemistry, C08K for polymer additives, and B32B for layered products, reflecting how epoxy adhesive claims typically span both the underlying resin chemistry and the bonded-application use case.
US5686509A claims an adhesion-reinforcing composition built from a core-shell copolymer particle, ion-crosslinked with a metal cation, where the core has a glass transition temperature at or below -30°C and the shell at or above 70°C. It does not block epoxy adhesive formulations generally; it covers a specific toughening-particle architecture. Formulations using different toughening mechanisms, such as elastomer adducts claimed in other highly cited records in this corpus, would need separate analysis rather than assuming this single patent controls the space.
Based on the IPC composition in this dataset, filing density is markedly lower in branches like B32B (layered products, 322 records), C09D (coatings, 312 records), C08J (polymer processing, 258 records) and C08F (addition polymers, 210 records) compared with the dominant C09J and C08G classes. Sub-areas such as debondable or recyclable epoxy joints and moisture-cure latent hardener systems also show lighter claim density in this corpus, making them worth a targeted prior-art check before filing rather than assuming they are open by default.
Research Epoxy Resin Adhesive Formulation in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole epoxy resin adhesive formulation 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.