Hydrogen Peroxide Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Filing has cooled since 2022. The trend peaked at 37 records that year and has not been matched since, with the most recent year understated by publication lag.
- The top 5 assignees hold 39.0% of all 628 records. and the top 10 hold 56.1% — concentration is real but a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants still files every year.
- Catalysis claims dominate the composition. B01J (catalytic processes) touches 37.1% of records against C01B's near-universal 98.9%, meaning most contested ground is in how the reaction is catalysed, not whether it is a peroxide process.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 628 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine hydrogen peroxide production terminology with claim language covering working solution degradation, hydrogenation catalyst regeneration, extraction and purification, concentration, and direct synthesis routes. The IPC scope is anchored on C01B15 (peroxides and per-compounds), B01J23 (catalysts) and B01D11 (extraction), which keeps the corpus centred on process chemistry rather than downstream end-use.
The anthraquinone (auto-oxidation) process still accounts for the bulk of the most-cited prior art in this set, but direct synthesis and electrolytic routes appear as a smaller, more recent thread in the classification data. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures in any trend chart should be read as provisional floors, not final counts.
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 628-record corpus: activity over time by filing year, and the IPC subclasses that carry the claims.
A peak in 2022, then a plateau
Annual filings rose from 7 in 2017 to a peak of 37 in 2022, then flattened. With 2022 as the midpoint of the observed range, the trend reads as flat-to-declining rather than accelerating, though the final one to two years are undercounted due to publication lag.
Catalysis and separation carry the contested claims
C01B covers 98.9% of records by definition of the search scope, but B01J (catalytic processes, 37.1%) and B01D (separation, 6.5%) mark where process-engineering claims concentrate. Smaller subclasses like C25B (electrolytic production, 2.9%) and C08G (condensation polymers, 2.1%) point to adjacent routes that remain thinly claimed relative to the core anthraquinone and catalytic-hydrogenation art.
Shares are the percentage of the 628 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Hydrogen Peroxide Production with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about hydrogen peroxide production and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe prior art doing the most work
Regenerating the noble metal hydrogenation catalyst at the heart of the anthraquinone process
US3901822A, assigned to FMC Corporation and issued in 1975, describes a process for restoring deactivated noble metal hydrogenation catalysts used in hydrogen peroxide production: a polar organic solvent wash, followed by ammonium hydroxide treatment, followed by steam and oxygen-containing gas exposure at temperatures up to the catalyst's crystal transition point.This filing predates most of the corpus by decades, which is why later assignees' catalyst-regeneration claims are typically drafted to sit outside its specific solvent-and-thermal sequence rather than to challenge it directly.
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6767447B2 | Electrolytic cell for hydrogen peroxide production and process for producing hydrogen peroxide | 411 |
| 2 | US4428923A | Continuous process for the production of hydrogen peroxide according to the anthraquinone process | 74 |
| 3 | US20050265915A1 | Hydrogen peroxide production in microchannel reactors | 73 |
| 4 | US4552748A | Method in the production of hydrogen peroxide | 73 |
| 5 | US6500969B1 | Integrated hydrogen peroxide production and organic chemical oxidation | 63 |
| 6 | US4428922A | Process for manufacturing hydrogen peroxide | 60 |
| 7 | US4061598A | Catalyst for hydrogenating anthraquinones | 55 |
| 8 | US20020153262A1 | Electrolytic cell for hydrogen peroxide production and process for producing hydrogen peroxide | 52 |
| 9 | CN102009960A | 一种蒽醌法生产过氧化氢的加氢方法 | 47 |
| 10 | CN103071487A | 一种蒽醌法固定床加氢催化剂及其制备方法 | 45 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and favour older filings; treat them as a signal of historical importance rather than 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 decision
Reading concentration, timing and classification together points to where new filings face dense prior art and where they do not.
The top of the field is settled, the rest is open
The leader holds 62 records and the fifth-ranked assignee holds 34 — a real gap, not a plateau. But the top 10 combined only reach 56.1% of all 628 records, which leaves nearly half the corpus to entities outside the ranked leaders.
Activity has not returned to its 2022 level
Several of the most established assignees in this space show zero filings in the latest tracked year. That pattern is consistent across multiple long-standing filers, suggesting either a genuine slowdown or a shift toward filing venues or claim language outside this search scope.
Catalysis, not the base reaction, is the contested ground
With C01B present in nearly every record by construction of the search, the meaningful split is B01J's 37.1% against smaller shares like C25B's 2.9% for electrolytic routes. Catalyst formulation and regeneration claims are dense; electrolytic and polymer-adjacent routes are comparatively sparse.
Collaboration is concentrated in a few research institute pairings
The strongest co-assignee link in the corpus pairs a major Chinese petrochemical group with its own research institute at 13 shared records, well ahead of the next pairings. Cross-company joint filings are otherwise rare in this dataset.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to hydrogen peroxide production, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gate sits
A handful of legacy chemical majors set the pace early; most recent activity outside that group is thin, single-digit filings from newer entrants.
A legacy chemical major still holds the largest single share
The top-ranked assignee's 62 records nearly double the fifth-place count of 34, reflecting decades of continuous filing around the anthraquinone and catalyst-regeneration art rather than a recent surge.
The drop-off after the top 10 is steep
Tenth place holds 17 records versus the leader's 62 — a more than three-fold gap within the ranked group itself, before the long tail of single- and few-filing entrants even begins.
Newer Chinese specialty-chemical filers appear but have not scaled
Several recently active entrants file in narrow, specific niches rather than broad process claims, consistent with a market where the core anthraquinone route is already heavily claimed by incumbents.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Solvay SA | 0 | -100% |
| Degussa AG | 0 | — |
| Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Company, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Evonik Operations GmbH | 0 | — |
| Eka Chemicals AB | 0 | — |
| Kemira Chemicals | 0 | — |
| Akzo Nobel NV | 0 | — |
| Eka AB | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or identifying open claim space.
Map the catalyst-regeneration claim boundary
With B01J carrying 37.1% of records and the oldest cited prior art centred on catalyst regeneration, a claim-by-claim comparison against the top assignees' recent filings will show exactly where the boundary sits today.
Explore in EurekaCheck electrolytic and direct-synthesis routes for open space
C25B's 2.9% share is thin relative to the core anthraquinone art, which may mean genuine white space or simply that filings sit under different IPC codes than this search captured.
Explore in EurekaTrack whether the 2022 peak was a one-off
Zero recent-year filings from several long-standing assignees could signal a real pullback or a shift to jurisdictions and formats outside this corpus; watching the next publication cycle will clarify which.
Explore in EurekaCommon questions about hydrogen peroxide production patents
One assignee leads the ranked field with 62 records out of 628 in scope, roughly double the fifth-place count of 34. The top 5 assignees combined account for 39.0% of all records, and the top 10 combined reach 56.1%. That still leaves close to half the corpus filed by entities outside the ten most active assignees, so the field is concentrated at the top but not closed to new entrants.
Filings rose from 7 in 2017 to a peak of 37 in 2022, then did not return to that level in subsequent years. Because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend will understate true activity, but even accounting for that lag, the trajectory since the 2022 peak reads as flat to declining rather than accelerating.
The anthraquinone (auto-oxidation) process dominates the most-cited historical patents in this corpus, including catalyst regeneration and continuous-process filings from the 1970s and 1980s. Direct synthesis and electrolytic routes show up in the classification data mainly under C25B, which covers only 2.9% of the 628 records — a much thinner claim base than the catalytic and separation classes tied to the anthraquinone route.
The classification data shows electrolytic direct synthesis (C25B, 2.9% of records) and condensation-polymer-adjacent stabiliser chemistry (C08G, 2.1%) as comparatively thin relative to the near-universal core class and the 37.1% share held by catalytic process claims. Working solution degradation monitoring and continuous extraction/purification trains are also areas with fewer dedicated filings in this corpus, though a full freedom-to-operate check would need to confirm this against claim-level detail rather than IPC share alone.
US3901822A, filed by FMC Corporation and issued in 1975, covers a specific sequence for regenerating deactivated noble metal hydrogenation catalysts using a polar organic solvent wash followed by ammonium hydroxide and then steam-oxygen treatment at defined temperatures. Its term has long since expired, so it no longer blocks anyone, but its claim structure is still cited as foundational prior art that later catalyst-regeneration filings are typically drafted around rather than through. Reviewing it is most useful for understanding the baseline sequence that subsequent patents differentiate from.
Research Hydrogen Peroxide Production in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole hydrogen peroxide production 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.