Graphene Oxide Patents: Filing Trends & Top Assignees 2026
- Filing has declined since 2019. Filings peaked at 74 in 2019 and have fallen since; 2022's midpoint of 44 confirms the trend is flat-to-declining, not a data artefact.
- China dominates the filing venue. 346 of 653 records were filed in China, more than the next four offices (US, EPO, India, WIPO) combined.
- Polymer-integration IPC classes outweigh pure nanotech. C08K and C08L (polymer additives and compositions) together carry more records than B82Y (nanotechnology), showing the field is claimed mainly as a materials-integration problem.
Filing growth compares 2021 (50 records) with 2024 (48) — 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 653 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
A materials-integration field, not a standalone nanotech niche
Graphene oxide and functionalized graphene patents span oxidation degree control, reduction methods, dispersion in polymer and composite matrices, and the barrier and conductivity properties that result. The IPC composition shows C01B (non-metallic elements and inorganic compounds) as the largest single class at 402 records, but the combined weight of C08K, C08L and C08J — additives, compositions and processing of polymers — signals that most filings exist to put graphene oxide into something else: a coating, a composite, a film.
Filing activity rose through the late 2010s, peaked in 2019 at 74 records, and has trended down since, with the 2022 midpoint at 44 confirming a genuine slowdown rather than a reporting gap. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent years in the trend will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be, but the multi-year decline from the 2019 peak predates that lag effect.
Filing trend and technology composition
653 patent families across a decade of filing, broken down by year and by IPC subclass, show where claim density sits and where it has thinned out.
A decade past its filing peak
From 67 filings in 2017 to a peak of 74 in 2019, the trend has since declined toward 8 in the most recent partial year. Read the final one or two years as undercounted due to publication lag, not as a cliff.
Polymer integration outweighs pure nanotechnology claims
C01B leads at 402 records, with C08K (223) and C08L (197) close behind. B82Y, the dedicated nanotechnology class, trails at 64 — evidence that most applicants are claiming graphene oxide as a functional additive rather than as a nanomaterial in its own right.
Shares are the percentage of the 653 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Graphene Oxide and Functionalization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about graphene oxide and functionalization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records anchor the reduction and barrier-property claims
US9318231B2 — Method of preparing reduced graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide-polymer composites
Methods of preparing reduced graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide-polymer composites. The methods include covalently binding a halogen-substituted aromatic compound to a graphene oxide and heat treating the graphene oxide with the halogen-substituted aromatic compound covalently bound thereto at a low temperature, for example 450 degrees Celsius or less. Using these methods, reduced graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide-polymer composites with high electrical conductivities (30,000 S/m or more) may be obtained.Filed by Korea Institute of Science and Technology, granted 2016-04-19.

| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CN102674315A | 一种石墨烯-碳纳米管复合全碳超轻弹性气凝胶及其制备方法 | 104 |
| 2 | CN102115566A | 高阻隔性氧化石墨烯和聚合物纳米复合膜的制备方法 | 69 |
| 3 | CN104030275A | 一种还原氧化石墨烯导热薄膜的制备方法 | 53 |
| 4 | US20160064726A1 | Storage battery electrode, manufacturing method thereof, storage battery, electronic device, and graphene | 50 |
| 5 | US20110114897A1 | Functionalized graphene sheets having high carbon to oxygen ratios | 47 |
| 6 | CN105820519A | PET基石墨烯复合材料、其制备方法及浮空器 | 46 |
| 7 | CN103508447A | 石墨烯的制备方法 | 44 |
| 8 | US20160349905A1 | Film formation method and element | 42 |
| 9 | WO2019070514A1 | Methods and apparatus for the production of graphite oxide and reduced graphene oxide | 41 |
| 10 | US20170106342A1 | Reduced Graphene Oxide Barrier Materials | 39 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations within this searched corpus; treat them as a signal of influence on the field's vocabulary, not as a ranking of current commercial relevance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 a filing or freedom-to-operate decision
Three patterns in the dataset matter more than any single ranking: where the volume sits, where it is heading, and where the citation weight has landed.
China is the primary filing venue by a wide margin
China's 346 records outnumber the US (130), EPO (63), India (32), WIPO (28) and Australia (11) combined. A freedom-to-operate search that skips Chinese-language prior art in this field is searching well under half the corpus.
The field has cooled since its 2019 peak
Filing volume has declined from a 2019 peak of 74 through a 2022 midpoint of 44 toward single digits in the most recent partial year. Some of that recent drop is publication lag, but the multi-year direction predates it.
Claims cluster on materials chemistry, not nanotech classification
C01B (inorganic compounds) carries more than six times the record count of B82Y (nanotechnology applications), reinforcing that most applicants frame graphene oxide work as a chemistry and materials-integration problem rather than a nanomaterials-specific one.
Aerogel and barrier-film claims carry the heaviest citation weight
The most-cited record concerns a graphene-carbon nanotube aerogel; the next two most-cited concern high-barrier composite films and thermally conductive reduced graphene oxide films. Older filings on these three sub-areas set much of the field's citation baseline.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to graphene oxide and functionalization, with the prior art for and against each one.
A fragmented field with almost no collaborative filing
With only two identified co-assignee pairs across 653 families, this is a field of independent filers rather than joint ventures or research consortia. Recent-year momentum is thin across the board, consistent with the broader post-2019 slowdown.
Co-filing is nearly absent
The strongest co-assignee link pairs a Chinese materials company with a university research institute; a second pair links a national oil company with its US affiliate. Neither reflects a broader pattern of joint filing in the space.
Recent-year filing has gone quiet even among named assignees
Every tracked assignee shows zero or one filing in the latest year, including entities that filed steadily in earlier years. This mirrors the corpus-wide decline rather than signalling any single company's exit.
Filing strategy is regionally concentrated
Beyond China's lead, the US, EPO, India, WIPO and Australia each carry a fraction of the volume, suggesting most assignees are prioritising a single home jurisdiction rather than building broad multi-region families.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Hangzhou Gaoxi Technology Co., Ltd. | 1 | — |
| ArcelorMittal | 0 | — |
| Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Tetra Laval Holdings & Finance S.A. (Switzerland) | 0 | — |
| Shenzhen Yuewang Energy Saving Technology Service Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) | 0 | — |
| King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) | 0 | — |
| Fuzhou University | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field past its filing peak but still active in specific niches. These are reasonable next steps for a team deciding where to file or license.
Run a China-language prior art search before filing
With 346 of 653 records filed in China, an FTO search limited to English-language databases misses more than half the relevant prior art in this field.
Search Chinese filings in EurekaModel the reduction-method and barrier-property claim clusters
The most-cited records concentrate on aerogels, barrier films and thermally conductive films; mapping claim scope in these three areas clarifies what is already occupied.
Map claim clusters in EurekaWatch battery-electrode overlap for new entrants
H01M (batteries) accounts for 46 records within this corpus, a smaller but distinct overlap worth monitoring as electrode applications for graphene oxide develop separately from coatings and composites.
Track H01M overlap in EurekaCommon questions about graphene oxide patents
The filing trend in this dataset peaked at 74 records in 2019 and has declined toward single digits by the most recent partial year, with the 2022 midpoint of 44 confirming the drop is real rather than a data gap. This pattern is consistent with a field where core oxidation, reduction and dispersion methods were claimed early and heavily, leaving less unclaimed ground for new filings. It does not mean commercial interest in graphene oxide has stopped; it means the patent claim space for these specific methods has become more crowded, pushing new work toward adjacent applications like battery electrodes or laminates rather than the core chemistry itself.
China accounts for 346 of the 653 records in this corpus, more than the next four receiving offices combined (US at 130, EPO at 63, India at 32, WIPO at 28). Any competitive or freedom-to-operate analysis in this field needs to include Chinese-language filings, since excluding them would mean missing over half of the identified prior art. That said, the choice of where to file your own application should follow your target markets and manufacturing base, not just where prior art density is highest.
US9318231B2, held by Korea Institute of Science and Technology, claims a method of preparing reduced graphene oxide by covalently binding a halogen-substituted aromatic compound to graphene oxide and then heat-treating it at 450 degrees Celsius or less, producing reduced graphene oxide with electrical conductivity of 30,000 S/m or more. It is a process claim tied to a specific chemistry (halogen-substituted aromatic binding) and a specific low-temperature thermal treatment step, not a claim over reduced graphene oxide generally. Anyone using a different chemical route to bind functional groups before reduction, or a different heat-treatment regime, is working outside its literal claim scope, though a design-around should be checked against the full claim set, not the abstract alone.
The IPC data shows heavy representation in C08K (223 records, additives in polymers), C08L (197 records, polymer compositions) and C08J (113 records, polymer processing), indicating that integrating graphene oxide into polymer matrices is one of the most heavily claimed application areas in this corpus. That density does not mean every specific dispersion technique or matrix combination is occupied, but it does mean a broad claim to graphene oxide dispersion in polymers is unlikely to clear prior art cleanly. Narrower claims tied to a specific matrix chemistry, dispersion method, or resulting property are more likely to find open ground.
The dataset shows a fragmented ownership picture with almost no collaborative filing — only two co-assignee pairs were identified across 653 families. Recent-year momentum data shows every tracked assignee at zero or one filing in the latest year, including companies and institutes that filed more actively in earlier years, which lines up with the broader corpus-wide slowdown since 2019. This suggests the field currently has no single assignee aggressively expanding its position; a competitive monitoring strategy should track filing volume shifts over the next one to two years rather than assume the current leaders will remain static.
Research Graphene Oxide and Functionalization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole graphene oxide and functionalization 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.