Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/hydrometallurgy-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Mining, Minerals & Critical MaterialsHydrometallurgy patents: who is filing, what they claim, and where the field is still open
- 406 records across the five leading filers, just 13.6% of the 2,980 records in scope — the field is fragmented rather than gated by a handful of players.
- C22B carries 83.8% of records, but batteries-linked H01M and electrolytic C25C classes each still clear 8-12%, showing where recovery chemistry is migrating.
- Filings ran from 171 in 2017 to a 2021 peak of 192, then to 118 by 2024 — a real pullback, not a data artefact, since 2024 is the last complete year in this trend.
2,980
Published Records
14%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-39%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (192 records) with 2024 (118) — 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 2,980 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What sits inside this landscape
Hydrometallurgy patents in this dataset cluster around aqueous processing of ore and process residue — leaching, solvent extraction, ion exchange and electrolytic recovery of metal values, plus the separation reagents and circuit designs that make those routes workable at scale. The search string pairs core hydrometallurgical process terms with recovery- and equipment-specific language, so the corpus skews toward operational process claims rather than pure analytical chemistry.
Most records sit inside metal extraction and refining (C22B), with meaningful overlap into battery materials, electrolytic production and water treatment — a sign that recovery chemistry originally built for base-metal ores is being re-purposed for battery-metal circuits and effluent handling.
Filing activity by year, 2017-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers
Filing trends and technology composition
The dataset spans 2,980 published records filed between 2015 and the 2026 cut-off, with publication lagging filing by roughly 18 months — so the final one to two years in any chart will always look thinner than the underlying filing activity actually was.
A 2021 peak, then a real pullback
Annual filings rose from 171 in 2017 to a peak of 192 in 2021, then fell to 118 by 2024 — a 39% decline over that three-year span. Because 2024 is the most recent year that can be treated as complete, this is read as a genuine cooling in filing activity rather than an artefact of publication lag; 2025 and 2026 figures will rise as later filings publish, but the 2021-2024 trend itself is not in question.
Extraction dominates, but adjacent classes are thickening
C22B (metal extraction & refining) appears on 83.8% of the 2,980 records, the expected core of a hydrometallurgy search. Below it, C01G (compounds of other metals) at 14.3%, C25C (electrolytic metal production) at 12.3% and H01M (batteries, cells & fuel cells) at 8.9% point to recovery chemistry increasingly framed around battery-metal supply chains rather than only bulk base-metal output.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,980 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about hydrometallurgy patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
A representative recent filing
Representative Record
Valuable metal recovery composition and recovery method (EP4733424A1)
POSCO HOLDINGS INC.
The filing describes a valuable metal recovery composition built from unit particles with a metal-containing core and a lithium-containing oxide shell, with a claimed particle-size distribution limit — no more than 70% of the composition exceeding a 4,000 micrometre average diameter. The structure targets controlled recovery behaviour through particle architecture rather than reagent chemistry alone.Filed by POSCO Holdings, published 2026-04-29 — close to the data cut-off, so its citation and family footprint are still forming.
Most-cited records in this landscape
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160045841A1 | New and improved system for processing various chemicals and materials | 860 |
| 2 | WO2001000890A1 | Process for the extraction of copper | 392 |
| 3 | WO2014153570A2 | New and improved system for processing various chemicals and materials | 219 |
| 4 | US6319389B1 | Recovery of copper values from copper ores | 131 |
| 5 | US20050118081A1 | Process for the recovery of value metals from base metal sulfide ores | 109 |
| 6 | US20050053818A1 | Ion exchange composite material based on proton conductive functionalized inorganic support compounds in a po… | 100 |
| 7 | US5993635A | Atmospheric mineral leaching process | 97 |
| 8 | US6312500B1 | Heap leaching of nickel containing ore | 93 |
| 9 | US5476591A | Liquid treatment system and method for operating the same | 85 |
| 10 | US6193858B1 | Spouted bed apparatus for contacting objects with a fluid | 82 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations inside this corpus — treat them as a signal of influence, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are read against each other: fragmented leadership, a technology core with thickening adjacencies, and a filing trend that peaked before the most recent complete data year.
Concentration
13.6%
of 2,980 records held by the top 5 filers
No single gatekeeper
The five most active assignees combine for 406 of the 2,980 records in scope — 13.6% of the field. That leaves the large majority of filing activity spread across a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants, so freedom-to-operate risk in most process variants comes from density of prior art rather than from one dominant portfolio holder.
Based on the full 100-company ranking returned by the dataset.
Technology mix
83.8%
of records carry a C22B class
Extraction is the core, batteries are the edge
C22B anchors the field, but H01M appearing on 8.9% of records and C25C on 12.3% show recovery-circuit patents increasingly framed around battery-metal chemistry and electrolytic finishing rather than bulk ore processing alone.
Classes overlap on individual records, so shares do not sum to 100%.
Filing momentum
192 → 118
annual filings, 2021 to 2024
A cooling after a 2021 peak
Filing activity climbed from 171 in 2017 to 192 in 2021, then declined to 118 by 2024 — a 39% drop across that span. With 2024 as the last complete year in the trend, this reads as a genuine slowdown in new filing rather than a publication-lag effect.
2025-2026 figures will still rise as later filings publish.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to hydrometallurgy patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Who Is Filing
The competitive set
The ranked leaders span mining majors, specialty chemical suppliers, equipment makers and a university, with the strongest co-assignee pairing linking a mining major to its own regional services arm — a sign of internal group filing structure rather than external collaboration.
Leader
102 records
leading assignee
A modest lead, not a monopoly
The top-ranked assignee holds 102 records against a fifth-place figure of 59 and a tenth-place figure of 40 — a gradual taper rather than a cliff, consistent with a field where process know-how is distributed across many operators and licensors.
Counted in records across the 100-company ranking.
Collaboration
10 pairs
co-assignee pairings in the dataset
Filing partnerships are rare and mostly internal
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset. The strongest pairing links a mining major with its own South African corporate services entity, and the next-strongest links a university with a metal-recovery technology firm — patterns of corporate structure and licensing more than open industry collaboration.
Strongest pair: 57 shared records.
Momentum
-86% YoY
latest-year change for several leading filers
Recent-year activity is thinning across leaders
Several of the most active historical filers show sharp latest-year declines or zero filings, but this sits inside the window most affected by publication lag — recent-year momentum figures for individual assignees should be read alongside the field-wide 2021-2024 trend rather than in isolation.
Latest-year figures are the most likely to still be revised upward.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Anglo Corp Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd | 1 | -86% |
| ANGLO CORP SERVICES SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD | 1 | -86% |
| FLSmidth & Co. A/S | 0 | — |
| University of British Columbia | 0 | — |
| Phelps Dodge Corporation | 0 | — |
| BASF SE | 0 | -100% |
| Mint Innovation Ltd | 0 | -100% |
| Jetti Resources LLC | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps rather than a single conclusion — the field is too fragmented for one filing move to close it off.
Map claim density against the gate chips
Run a focused search against the under-claimed branches above before drafting new claims, since general C22B coverage says little about density in these narrower circuits.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the leading filers' latest-year activity
Several top assignees show sharp recent-year pullbacks that may reflect publication lag rather than a real exit — worth revisiting once another filing year publishes.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaCheck citation leaders for design-around risk
The most-cited records in this set are older filings with broad process claims; any new filing in metal recovery should be checked against them specifically, not just against recent publications.
Review cited prior art in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about hydrometallurgy patents
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 102 of the 2,980 records in scope, with the fifth-ranked filer at 59 and the tenth-ranked filer at 40. That gradual taper, rather than a sharp cliff after the leader, indicates the field is fragmented across mining majors, chemical suppliers and equipment makers rather than controlled by one dominant portfolio. Anyone assessing freedom to operate should look at density across the full ranked set, not just the top name.
Filings rose from 171 in 2017 to a peak of 192 in 2021, then fell to 118 by 2024 — a 39% decline over that three-year span. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures in any chart will look artificially low and should not be read as confirming further decline. The 2021-2024 drop itself, however, is based on complete data and represents a real slowdown in new filing activity.
Metal extraction and refining (IPC class C22B) appears on 83.8% of the 2,980 records, making it the dominant technical category by a wide margin. Beneath that core, compounds of other metals (C01G), electrolytic metal production (C25C) and battery-related classifications (H01M) each cover meaningful minority shares, pointing to recovery chemistry increasingly tied to battery-metal supply chains. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed.
EP4733424A1, filed by POSCO Holdings and published in April 2026, claims a valuable metal recovery composition built from particles with a metal-containing core and a lithium-containing oxide shell, with a specific particle-size distribution limit on the finished composition. It is a structural and process claim around particle architecture rather than a broad chemistry claim, so it is most relevant to anyone designing recovery compositions with core-shell particle structures for lithium-bearing streams. Given its recent publication date, its citation footprint and licensing posture are still forming.
Relative to the dense core coverage in metal extraction and refining, narrower circuits such as residue re-leaching for critical-metal recovery, selective ion exchange for lithium and cobalt separation, and wastewater-integrated recovery loops show thinner record density. These are not gaps in the broad sense — the surrounding chemistry is well documented — but the specific process integrations remain comparatively under-claimed. A targeted search against each branch before drafting is the practical way to confirm how open a given claim scope actually is.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Hydrometallurgy Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole hydrometallurgy patent landscape 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.