Full Empty Capsid Separation Patents: Who Leads and Where the Field Is Still Open
Concentrated at the top. The top 5 assignees hold 80.8% of all 52 records in scope, with the leader alone accounting for 15 records. Filings rose to a peak of 19 records in 2022, then declined to 6 by 2024 — a -14% move from 2021's 7 records over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the apparent tail-off should not be read as the field cooling.
- 1瑞士杰特贝林生物制品有限公司28.8%
- 2安基拉治疗公司19.2%
- 3辉瑞公司17.3%
- 4安进公司7.7%
- 5北卡罗莱纳州立大学7.7%
See the full full empty capsid separation analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions on full/empty capsid separation patents
What patented methods separate full from empty AAV capsids?
The two dominant patented approaches in this dataset are anion exchange chromatography (AEX), which separates capsids by the conductivity difference between full and empty shells, and density-gradient methods such as ultracentrifugation. AEX-based claims, including WO2024038365A1, are positioned explicitly as scalable alternatives to ultracentrifugation, which is harder to run at commercial manufacturing volumes. Analytical capsid content assays also appear as a distinct but related claim category, used to verify separation performance rather than perform the separation itself. Reviewing a specific portfolio's claims is necessary before choosing a process route, since the chemistry details differ meaningfully between filings.
Who holds the most patents in full/empty capsid separation?
Filing activity is concentrated: the top-ranked assignee alone holds 15 of the 52 records in scope, and the top 5 combined hold 80.8% of all records. The field then tapers sharply, with the fifth-place assignee holding only 4 records and the tenth-place assignee just 1. This pattern — a dominant leader plus a long tail of low-filing entrants — means competitive analysis should focus first on the leader's specific claim scope rather than assuming coverage is evenly spread across the ranked assignees.
Is patent filing in this space growing or slowing?
Filings rose from 0 in 2017 to a peak of 19 records in 2022, then measured a -14% change from 2021 (7 records) to 2024 (6 records) — the most recent year that can be treated as complete. Because patent publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the lower counts visible in 2025 and 2026 are an artifact of that lag rather than proof the field is cooling. A fair read of momentum needs another 12-18 months of publications before drawing conclusions about 2025-26 filing behaviour.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Full Empty Capsid Separation covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.