Flow Cytometry Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One assignee holds 97 of 196 records in scope — nearly half the entire dataset before any of the other 29 ranked companies are counted.
- The top 5 assignees account for 86.7% of all 196 records while the top 10 cover 100.0% — this field has almost no long tail beyond its ranked leaders.
- Filing peaked in 2021 at 50 records and has since flattened with the 2022 midpoint at 17, suggesting the core claim space is largely staked out.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 196 published records at the intersection of flow cytometry instrumentation and its adjacent measurement, bioinformatics and lab-apparatus classes, filtered to documents that specify fluorochrome panel design, spectral unmixing, sort purity and yield, microfluidic sorting or spillover compensation in their title or claims. Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, with the most recent filing year necessarily undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
The picture that emerges is not a fragmented field. A single assignee accounts for roughly half the records in scope, and the top ten ranked assignees between them account for the entire dataset — there is essentially no independent long tail of small filers competing on the core claims.
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 196 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Annual filings rose from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 50 in 2021, then eased back toward the 2022 midpoint of 17 and down to 4 again by 2026 — read the final year or two as partial, since publication lags filing by about 18 months.
IPC subclass composition
Almost every record (194 of 196, 99.0%) sits in G01N material analysis and testing, the instrument core. Smaller but recurring clusters appear in G01J radiation/light measurement (8.7%), G16B bioinformatics (7.7%), and B01L lab apparatus, G01F flow measurement and G06F data processing (5.6% each) — these secondary classes are where differentiated claims tend to live, since a record can carry several classes at once.
Shares are the percentage of the 196 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Flow Cytometry Technology with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about flow cytometry technology and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited records
Methods and systems for assessing the suitability of a fluorochrome panel for use in generating flow cytometer data
Filed by Becton, Dickinson and Company, this 2023 filing covers methods for assessing whether a given fluorochrome panel is suitable for a specific flow cytometer configuration. The approach obtains a spectral matrix tied to an instrument identifier, calculates its inverse, and analyzes that inverse matrix to flag fluorochromes likely to introduce variance into the resulting data — a computational check on panel design before it reaches the bench.Abstract condensed from the original filing for length.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US10481074B2 | Systems and user interface for collecting a data set in a flow cytometer | 81 |
| 2 | WO2016054293A1 | Imaging flow cytometer using spatial-temporal transformation | 74 |
| 3 | US20170227466A1 | Imaging flow cytometer using spatial-temporal transformation | 55 |
| 4 | US20210263019A1 | Bi-specific probes to enable the use of single-cell samples as single color compensation control | 38 |
| 5 | US20180024040A1 | Compact detection module for flow cytometers | 37 |
| 6 | WO2013188756A1 | Oligonucleotide-mediated quantitative multiplexed immunoassays | 33 |
| 7 | US20190353577A1 | Fast recompensation of flow cytometery data for spillover readjustments | 22 |
| 8 | US20180299367A1 | Compact multi-color flow cytometer having compact detection module | 21 |
| 9 | US10267736B2 | Imaging flow cytometer using spatial-temporal transformation | 21 |
| 10 | US20220082488A1 | Methods of forming multi-color fluorescence-based flow cytometry panel | 20 |
Citation counts favour older records in any searched corpus — treat them as a signal of influence within this dataset, not as a measure 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 numbers mean for filing strategy
Three findings that shape where new claims can realistically land in this space.
The field has almost no competitive middle
With the top 5 assignees covering 86.7% of all 196 records and the top 10 covering 100.0%, there is no meaningful tier of mid-size filers to benchmark against — a new entrant is negotiating claim space directly against the leader, not against a crowd.
Filing activity has already crested
Annual filings rose to a peak of 50 in 2021 before easing toward the 2022 midpoint of 17 and falling further since. That pattern reads as a field where the dominant claim space was staked out early rather than one still being actively contested.
Instrumentation claims dominate; software and bioinformatics are secondary
Almost every record touches G01N material analysis and testing, but only 7.7% carry a G16B bioinformatics class and 5.6% a G06F data-processing class. Claims that combine cytometry hardware with data-analysis methods are a minority position, not the norm.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to flow cytometry technology, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space, and what is still open
The ranked leader's recent-year momentum has fallen sharply, which is worth reading alongside its historical share before assuming its position is unassailable going forward.
One assignee dominates by volume, but its own filing pace has dropped
The top-ranked assignee holds 97 of the 196 records in scope, yet its most recent-year filings fell 93% year over year according to the recent-momentum data. Historical dominance and current filing pace are two different signals, and here they point in different directions.
Collaboration is limited and mostly institutional
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, with the strongest pairing linking two related biotech entities on 11 shared records. Cross-company collaboration is not a major feature of this field's filing behaviour.
Filing is concentrated in the US and Europe
The United States receives 102 filings and Europe (EPO) 55, with WIPO PCT filings at 23 and China at just 6. Anyone assessing freedom-to-operate should weight US and European prosecution first.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Becton, Dickinson and Company | 2 | -93% |
| Cytek Biosciences | 0 | -100% |
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | — |
| Guangzhou Kaipu Pharmaceutical Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Guangdong Hybribio Biotech Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| NanoCellect Biomedical, Inc. | 0 | — |
| SCINTILLON INST FOR BIOMEDICAL & BIOENERGY RES | 0 | — |
| Lase Innovation Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape points to a field with concentrated ownership and a cooling filing pace — the next steps depend on whether you are filing, licensing, or clearing a product.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's claims
With one assignee holding roughly half the records in scope, any new instrumentation or panel-design filing should start with a claim-by-claim comparison against that assignee's granted family before drafting.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaTarget the thin secondary classes
G16B bioinformatics and G06F data-processing classes cover under 8% of records each despite near-universal G01N coverage — that gap is where a differentiated claim is more likely to survive examination.
Explore white space in EurekaWatch for a re-acceleration signal
Filing has fallen from its 2021 peak, but a 93% YoY drop at the leader could mean a strategic pause rather than exit. Track the next one to two publication years once the 18-month lag clears.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions about flow cytometry patents
Within this 196-record dataset, one assignee holds 97 records — roughly half the entire scope — with the next four ranked assignees together bringing the top 5 combined share to 86.7% of all records. That leaves the remaining ranked assignees, out to the tenth position, accounting for the rest of the field, since the top 10 combined cover 100.0% of the 196 records. This is a genuinely concentrated field rather than one with a long tail of small independent filers.
No, filing activity peaked in 2021 at 50 records and has since declined, with the 2022 midpoint sitting at 17 and activity continuing to taper toward the most recent years. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the last one to two years in any trend chart will always understate true filing activity, so the real trajectory may be slightly less steep than it appears. Even accounting for that lag, the shape is a flattening or declining one rather than a growth curve.
Almost every record in this dataset — 99.0% of 196 records — carries a G01N material analysis and testing classification, reflecting the instrumentation core of flow cytometry. Smaller but recurring clusters sit in G01J radiation and light measurement, G16B bioinformatics, B01L lab apparatus, G01F flow measurement, and G06F data processing, each covering between roughly 5% and 9% of records. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these percentages add up to more than 100% and should not be summed or compared to a whole-field total.
The IPC composition data shows that while instrumentation claims (G01N) are almost universal, claims combining cytometry hardware with bioinformatics-driven gating or data-processing methods are comparatively rare, each appearing in under 8% of the 196 records. Microfluidic sorting refinements and compact detection-module miniaturisation also show thinner coverage relative to the instrumentation core. These are the branches where a first claim is less likely to run into dense prior art from the dominant assignee.
US20230393049A1, filed by Becton, Dickinson and Company, claims a method for assessing whether a fluorochrome panel is suitable for a given flow cytometer by obtaining a spectral matrix tied to an instrument identifier, computing its inverse, and analyzing that inverse matrix to flag fluorochromes likely to introduce variance into the output data. It is a computational pre-check on panel design rather than a claim over the cytometer hardware itself. Anyone building automated panel-validation software should review this filing's specific matrix-inversion approach before shipping a similar feature.
Research Flow Cytometry Technology in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole flow cytometry technology 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.