In Situ Chemical Oxidation Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- 69.9% of all 123 records sit with just five assignees — the top 10 combined account for 93.5%, leaving a thin long tail behind a concentrated core.
- Filings fell 86% from 7 in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the last year the dataset treats as complete; 2025-2026 figures are still filling in under publication lag.
- B09C soil reclamation dominates at 80.5% of records, while narrower classes like C09K materials and C01B inorganic compounds sit in single digits — a sign of where claim space is still open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (7 records) with 2024 (1) — 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 123 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the patent record shows about ISCO remediation
In situ chemical oxidation uses injected oxidants — persulfate, permanganate, peroxide-based systems — to break down contaminants directly in soil and groundwater without excavation. The patent record for this field is small and old relative to many industrial technologies: 123 records span 2015 through the middle of 2026, with a peak filing year in 2019 and a marked decline since. That pattern is consistent with a technology area where the core chemistry — oxidant activation, delivery, and reaction control — was substantially claimed in the 2000s and early 2010s, and where recent activity is incremental rather than foundational.
The most-cited records in the dataset are dominated by nanoparticle-activated oxidant systems and soil remediation compositions filed roughly a decade or more ago, which still anchor prior-art searches today. Newer filings cluster around narrower problems: managing oxidant demand in heterogeneous aquifers, controlling injection radius, and addressing concentration rebound after treatment — practical engineering issues rather than new oxidant chemistries.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 123-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses.
A peak in 2019, then a steep pullback
Filings rose to a peak of 7 in 2019, held near that level through 2021, then dropped 86% to 1 by 2024 — the last year the dataset treats as complete. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming further decline.
Soil reclamation and water treatment classes dominate
B09C (soil and contaminated land reclamation) appears on 80.5% of the 123 records, with C02F (water and wastewater treatment) on 46.3% and A62D (chemical protection and detox) on 25.2%. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares overlap rather than sum to 100%; smaller classes like C11D, C09K, B09B, C01B and C07C each cover under 10% of records, marking narrower and less-crowded claim territory.
Shares are the percentage of the 123 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Groundwater and Soil with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about in situ chemical oxidation of groundwater and soil and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records that still anchor prior-art searches
US9616472B2 — Oxidation of Contaminants
Various embodiments of contaminant removal systems, compositions, and methods are described. In one embodiment, a method for oxidizing a contaminant includes contacting the contaminant with a peroxygen compound and initializing, maintaining, or propagating degradation of the peroxygen compound with an oxygenated organic compound, thereby releasing oxidizing radicals, which oxidize the contaminant.Filed by Washington State University, granted 2017 — illustrates the shift from raw oxidant chemistry claims toward controlled-release and activation-pathway claims.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7963720B2 | Polymer coated nanoparticle activation of oxidants for remediation and methods of use thereof | 75 |
| 2 | US20080207981A1 | Soil remediation method and composition | 68 |
| 3 | US8206062B2 | Soil remediation method and composition | 55 |
| 4 | US20190241452A1 | Soil and water remediation method and apparatus for treatment of recalcitrant halogenated substances | 54 |
| 5 | US7976241B2 | Soil remediation method and composition | 54 |
| 6 | US20100185039A1 | Method for extraction and surfactant enhanced subsurface contaminant recovery | 53 |
| 7 | US20140246366A1 | Method and Apparatus for Treating Perfluoroalkyl Compounds | 41 |
| 8 | US20180319685A1 | Soil and water remediation method and apparatus for treatment of recalcitrant halogenated substances | 40 |
| 9 | US20110139695A1 | In SITU ph adjustment for solid and groundwater remediation | 38 |
| 10 | WO2007126779A2 | Soil remediation method and composition | 26 |
Citation counts favour older records in any searched corpus; treat these as markers of influence on later filings, not as evidence of current technical importance.
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
The dataset points to a mature, consolidated core with narrow openings at the edges rather than a growing frontier.
A small group controls the core chemistry
Five assignees account for 69.9% of all 123 records in scope, and the top 10 combined reach 93.5%. New entrants filing on core persulfate or permanganate activation chemistry are filing into dense, well-established prior art held by a handful of players.
Activity has pulled back sharply
Filings dropped from 7 in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the last year the dataset treats as complete. That decline reads less as market exit and more as the core chemistry having already been claimed, pushing remaining innovation toward engineering refinements.
Soil reclamation is the dominant class, not the only one
B09C covers four out of five records, but C02F water treatment (46.3%) and A62D chemical protection (25.2%) overlap heavily with it, showing most filings address combined soil-and-water treatment rather than either domain alone.
Filing activity is US-centred with a European and PCT tail
The United States receives more filings than any other office (51), followed by the EPO (19) and WIPO/PCT (17), with Canada and Australia further behind — consistent with a remediation technology driven by US regulatory drivers first.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to in situ chemical oxidation of groundwater and soil, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it is still open
The ranked leaders sit atop a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants; the strongest co-filing relationships point to durable university-industry and inventor-company pairings rather than shifting alliances.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 28 records, more than triple the count at fifth place (9), indicating a filer that built out a broad portfolio early and has continued to defend it across related claim types.
A tight cluster fills out the top 10
From fifth to tenth place, counts compress from 9 down to 3, meaning the top 10 combined reach 93.5% of all 123 records — very little portfolio depth remains for assignees ranked below that band.
Company-inventor pairs anchor the strongest links
The strongest co-assignee relationship pairs a remediation technology company with an individual inventor across 6 shared records, ahead of two other pairs at 3 each — a pattern typical of small specialist firms built around a named scientist.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| VeruTEK Technologies Inc | 0 | — |
| OXYTEC LLC | 0 | — |
| Solutions-IES Inc | 0 | — |
| ETHICAL SOLUTIONS LLC | 0 | — |
| Carus Corp | 0 | — |
| Washington State University Research Foundation | 0 | — |
| KV ASSOCIATES INC | 0 | — |
| HOAG GEORGE E | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or identifying open claim space.
Map claims against the leading portfolio
With one assignee holding 28 of 123 records, a freedom-to-operate review should start by mapping its claim scope against any planned oxidant-activation or delivery method before drafting.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaPressure-test white space candidates
Narrow classes like C01B and C09K show low filing density; before treating that as an opening, check whether it reflects genuine white space or simply limited commercial interest.
Run a white space check in EurekaTrack post-2024 filings as they publish
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent 2021-2024 decline may understate actual recent activity; revisit the trend once 2025-2026 filings finish publishing.
Set a filing alert in EurekaCommon questions about ISCO remediation patents
Patent ownership in this field is concentrated: the top five assignees together hold 69.9% of the 123 records in scope, and the top ten reach 93.5%. The single leading assignee holds 28 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 9. This means most core oxidant-activation and delivery methods are already controlled by a small group, and any freedom-to-operate review should focus there first rather than across the full 36-assignee ranked list.
Filings peaked at 7 in 2019 and declined sharply afterward, falling 86% from 7 in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the most recent year the dataset treats as complete. Because patent publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a continued decline. The pattern overall suggests the core chemistry was substantially claimed earlier in the dataset's coverage, with recent activity shifting toward narrower engineering problems.
The dominant IPC class is B09C, soil and contaminated land reclamation, appearing on 80.5% of the 123 records, followed by C02F water and wastewater treatment at 46.3% and A62D chemical protection and detox at 25.2%. Smaller classes including C11D detergents, C09K materials, B09B solid waste disposal, C01B inorganic compounds and C07C organic compounds each cover under 10% of records. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these percentages overlap rather than summing to 100%, and the smaller classes mark comparatively open claim territory.
US9616472B2, assigned to Washington State University and granted in 2017, claims methods for oxidizing a contaminant by contacting it with a peroxygen compound and controlling degradation of that compound with an oxygenated organic compound to release oxidizing radicals. It sits within a broader cluster of highly-cited soil remediation composition patents in this dataset, several filed by other assignees a few years earlier. Anyone designing a peroxygen-based activation pathway should review its specific claim language on how degradation is initiated and propagated, since that mechanism-level detail is where overlap is most likely.
The narrowest IPC classes in this dataset — C01B inorganic compounds at 2.4% of records, C07C organic compounds at 1.6%, and B09B solid waste disposal at 3.3% — show the lowest filing density, alongside specific engineering problems like injection radius modelling in heterogeneous aquifers and concentration rebound control that appear in fewer filings than the core oxidant chemistry claims. These pockets are worth investigating for a first claim, though low density can also reflect limited commercial interest rather than genuine open space, so each candidate needs its own prior-art check before drafting.
Research In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Groundwater and Soil in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole in situ chemical oxidation of groundwater and soil 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.