Immunoglobulin Purification Patents: Who Leads, Where Gaps Are 2026
- 74.8% of all 1,561 records sit with just five assignees — this field is claimed narrowly, not broadly, so a freedom-to-operate search here is really a five-company search.
- Filings fell 65% from 2021 to 2024 (23 to 8), the last three-year span with complete data, after a 2017 peak of 47 — the wave of foundational filing has passed, though 2025-26 figures are still filling in.
- C07K peptide/protein claims cover 83.2% of records while separation-process filings under B01D sit at just 7.5% — the chemistry is heavily claimed, the hardware and process engineering around it much less so.
Filing growth compares 2021 (23 records) with 2024 (8) — 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 1,561 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset covers 1,561 published patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine immunoglobulin purification or IVIG production language with specific process terms: chromatography steps, IgA content control, aggregate removal, subclass distribution, stabilizer formulation and infusion tolerability. It captures the manufacturing and formulation layer of antibody-based biologics, not antibody discovery or indication claims in general.
Because a single purification process patent can spawn several continuations and multiple national filings, family-level counting is used throughout so that filing strategy in one jurisdiction does not inflate the picture of technical activity.
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
The two views below place raw filing volume against where those filings sit technically, using the IPC subclasses assigned to each record.
Filings peaked in 2017 and have since declined
Filings ran from 47 in 2017, the peak year, down to 8 in 2024, a 65% drop over the 2021-2024 span. The most recent one to two years understate true activity because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 counts will continue to rise as more records publish.
Peptide and medicinal-preparation classes dominate
C07K (peptides and proteins) appears on 83.2% of the 1,561 records in scope and A61K (medicinal preparations) on 49.9%, confirming that most filings claim the molecule or formulation itself. Separation-process classes such as B01D (7.5%) and B01J (4.9%) are comparatively thin, which is where process and hardware claims have more room.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,561 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Immunoglobulin Purification and IVIG Production with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about immunoglobulin purification and ivig production and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a representative filing
US20110257370A1 — Immunoglobulin purification
The invention reports a method for purifying an immunoglobulin by applying an aqueous, buffered solution containing monomeric, aggregated and fragmented immunoglobulin to an anion exchange chromatography material under conditions where the monomeric form does not bind, then recovering the monomeric immunoglobulin from the flow-through at a buffer pH of 8.0 to 8.5. One embodiment specifies a membrane anion exchange chromatography material.Filed by Hoffmann-La Roche; illustrates the flow-through anion exchange approach to monomer recovery that recurs across this dataset's chromatography claims.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5731168A | Method for making heteromultimeric polypeptides | 6,496 |
| 2 | US5641870A | Low pH hydrophobic interaction chromatography for antibody purification | 4,431 |
| 3 | WO1996027011A1 | A method for making heteromultimeric polypeptides | 3,960 |
| 4 | WO1998050431A2 | A method for making multispecific antibodies having heteromultimeric and common components | 2,181 |
| 5 | US7695936B2 | Knobs and holes heteromeric polypeptides | 1,640 |
| 6 | US5821333A | Method for making heteromultimeric polypeptides | 1,337 |
| 7 | WO1998045331A2 | Anti-VEGF antibodies | 1,215 |
| 8 | US5807706A | Method for making heteromultimeric polypeptides | 1,111 |
| 9 | US6884879B1 | Anti-VEGF antibodies | 1,062 |
| 10 | US7183076B2 | Method for making multispecific antibodies having heteromultimeric and common components | 1,053 |
Citation counts reflect age as much as importance — the oldest heteromultimeric-polypeptide filings accumulated citations over two decades and should be read as influential prior art, not as evidence of current commercial weight.
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
Three patterns recur across the dataset and each has a direct bearing on where new filings or design-around work are likely to succeed.
The top of the field is narrow
Combined, the leading five assignees hold 1,168 of the 1,561 records in scope, 74.8% of the total. That concentration means most of the core chromatography and aggregate-removal chemistry is already claimed by a small group, and any new entrant's freedom-to-operate analysis narrows quickly to those few portfolios.
Filing pace has cooled since the 2017 peak
Volume ran from 47 filings in 2017, the peak year, down to 23 in 2021 and 8 in 2024, a 65% decline over that three-year span. Recent-year momentum by the top assignees shows several at zero or negative year-on-year change, consistent with a field past its initial claiming rush rather than one still expanding rapidly.
Process engineering is thinner than the chemistry
Peptide and protein claims (C07K) and medicinal preparation claims (A61K) dominate the record set, while separation-process classifications (B01D, B01J) cover under 8% each. That gap suggests the underlying purification chemistry is heavily claimed while specific hardware, membrane and process-control implementations carry comparatively less coverage.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to immunoglobulin purification and ivig production, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the core claims, and where the gaps sit
A short list of assignees controls most of the record base, but the co-filing pairs and the thinner IPC classes point to specific places where the claim space is still open.
A single assignee dominates the ranking
The leading assignee holds 805 of the 1,561 records in scope, well ahead of fifth place at 40 and tenth place at 21. That gap between first and the rest of the ranked leaders is the steepest single fact in this dataset and defines the shape of the whole field.
Collaboration clusters around a handful of pairs
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pair sharing 23 records and the second-strongest 22. These pairings mostly link a large originator with a specialised technology partner, suggesting joint development rather than open licensing is the norm at the top of the field.
Everyone below the leaders files thinly
Beyond the top ranks, filing volume drops off quickly — tenth place holds 21 records against a leader with 805. The long tail of single- and few-filing entrants suggests most secondary players are patenting narrow process variants rather than building broad portfolios.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Genentech, Inc. | 1 | -50% |
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG | 0 | — |
| Genmab A/S | 0 | — |
| Gedeon Richter Plc | 0 | -100% |
| Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Omrix Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Company | 0 | — |
| ADC Biotechnology Ltd. | 0 | — |
Using this landscape in your own work
The figures above set the boundaries of the field; the next step is usually to test a specific claim or company against the full record set.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leaders
With 74.8% of records held by five assignees, a design-around analysis should start with those portfolios before looking at the long tail.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaWatch the under-claimed process branches
Separation-process classes remain thin relative to the core chemistry, which is where new filings have more room to establish a first claim.
Run a white-space search in EurekaTrack filings past the publication lag
2025 and 2026 counts will keep rising as records publish; revisit the trend once those years are closer to complete.
Set up a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
One assignee holds 805 of the 1,561 records in scope, far ahead of the rest of the ranked leaders, where fifth place sits at 40 records and tenth at 21. The top five assignees together account for 74.8% of all records in this dataset. That level of concentration means any competitive or freedom-to-operate analysis in this space should start with a small number of portfolios rather than a broad market scan.
Filings peaked in 2017 at 47 in a single year and have declined since, falling 65% from 23 filings in 2021 to 8 in 2024, the last year with reasonably complete data. Counts for 2025 and 2026 will look artificially low because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so they should not be read as a continuation of the decline. Taken together, the pattern looks like a field that filed its foundational claims early and has since settled into a lower, steadier rate.
Peptide and protein composition claims under C07K appear on 83.2% of the 1,561 records, and medicinal preparation claims under A61K on 49.9%, making these the densest parts of the landscape. Microorganism and genetic engineering claims (C12N) and therapeutic activity claims (A61P) each cover around 30% of records. Separation-process classes such as B01D and B01J are comparatively sparse, at 7.5% and 4.9% respectively, indicating the underlying chemistry is more heavily claimed than the process hardware around it.
The clearest gaps sit in separation-process engineering rather than in the core immunoglobulin chemistry, since B01D and B01J classes cover under 8% of records each against over 80% for C07K. Specific sub-areas worth watching include membrane-based flow-through polishing, continuous chromatography process control, and stabilizer formulation aimed at infusion tolerability, none of which show the same filing density as monomer- or aggregate-focused chemistry claims. A first claim in these areas would typically need to specify the process parameters and equipment configuration precisely, since the broad chemistry has already been claimed by the leading assignees.
Not necessarily. The most-cited records in this dataset, including several heteromultimeric-polypeptide and low-pH hydrophobic interaction chromatography filings, accumulated their citation counts over many years simply by being early and foundational. High citation counts are a better signal of historical influence on later filings than of current commercial relevance, since newer, more specific process patents may matter more for today's manufacturing decisions but have not yet had time to accumulate comparable citation volume.
Research Immunoglobulin Purification and IVIG Production in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole immunoglobulin purification and ivig 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.