Industrial Crystallization Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- 9.1% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees together hold 9,903 of the 108,646 records in scope — a real lead, but nowhere near a lock on the field.
- Filings down 41% since the 2019 peak year. From 756 records in 2021 to 447 in 2024, the complete-year trend shows a field past its highest filing density, not one still accelerating.
- Medicinal preparations dominate the class mix. A61K accounts for 4.2% of all records, more than double the share of C30B crystal growth itself — most crystallization claims are being filed to protect a drug product, not a crystallization method.
Filing growth compares 2021 (756 records) with 2024 (447) — 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 108,646 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the filing record shows
Industrial crystallization patents span a wide claim territory: particle size control, residence time in continuous crystallizers, process stream management, and the equipment-scale engineering that separates a lab crystallization from a plant one. The 108,646 records captured here run from 2015 through the current data cut-off, with filings peaking in 2019 at 807 and easing since. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent years in any trend chart understate real activity and should be read as provisional.
The assignee base is broad rather than tightly held. The ranked leaders' combined share sits at single-digit percentages of the whole, and the technology composition data shows crystallization claims embedded across pharmaceutical, battery, separation and inorganic chemistry applications rather than concentrated in one class.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 108,646-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings ran from 578 in 2017 to a peak of 807 in 2019, then eased to 447 by 2024 — the last year that can be read as complete. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in as publications catch up to filing dates.
IPC subclass composition
A61K (medicinal preparations) leads at 4.2% of all records, ahead of C01B, B01J, B01D, H01M, A61P, C30B and C01G, each in the 1.2–1.8% range. Records can carry several IPC classes, so these shares add up to more than the record total — that is expected.
Shares are the percentage of the 108,646 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Industrial Crystallization Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about industrial crystallization patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a recent filing
US20250315575A1 — Device and method for generating template-based crystallization process model
The application describes a system for building a crystallization process model by combining selectable templates — solubility, particle size distribution, crystallization device, process time and concentration factor — into a single model, then running a simulation against an injection liquid to derive a crystal suspension.Filed by CJ CheilJedang Corporation, published 2025-10-09.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6322901B1 | Highly luminescent color-selective nano-crystalline materials | 1,777 |
| 2 | US4314827A | Non-fused aluminum oxide-based abrasive mineral | 1,574 |
| 3 | US3678154A | Oral compositions for calculus retardation | 1,451 |
| 4 | US4623364A | Abrasive material and method for preparing the same | 1,261 |
| 5 | EP0384070A2 | Zeolite P, process for its preparation and its use in detergent compositions | 1,227 |
| 6 | US6225198B1 | Process for forming shaped group II-VI semiconductor nanocrystals, and product formed using process | 1,149 |
| 7 | US4044126A | Steroidal aerosol compositions and process for the preparation thereof | 1,088 |
| 8 | US4364923A | Chemical compounds | 1,056 |
| 9 | US4414209A | Micronized aerosol steroids | 1,034 |
| 10 | US6207229B1 | Highly luminescent color-selective materials and method of making thereof | 978 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate them — read this table as a map of foundational prior art, not of current commercial 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 →Reading the concentration and momentum data
The numbers point to a field with an identifiable top tier but a long tail of active filers behind it, and a filing curve that has cooled from its 2019 high.
A lead, not a lock
The five leading assignees combined hold 9.1% of all records in scope, and the top ten add up to 12.3%. That leaves the large majority of filing activity spread across a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants — this is not a field where a handful of players control the claim space.
Past its filing peak
Filing volume peaked in 2019 at 807 records and has since declined, with the complete-year data showing a drop from 756 in 2021 to 447 in 2024. That is a cooling of new claim activity, not a shrinking of the installed technology base.
Pharma applications lead the class mix
Medicinal preparations (A61K) carry more record share than any other subclass, ahead of inorganic compounds, catalysis, separation processes and batteries. Crystal growth itself (C30B) sits further down the list at 1.3%, suggesting most crystallization claims are riding inside a product patent rather than standing as a standalone process claim.
Foundational prior art skews old
The most-cited records in this corpus date back decades and cover abrasive materials, oral-care compositions and nano-crystalline luminescent materials — a reminder that citation counts favour age, and should be read as a signal of influence rather than of what matters today.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to industrial crystallization patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where activity has cooled
The ranked leaders span pharmaceutical, chemical, electronics and specialty-materials companies, but recent-year momentum data shows most of the visible leaders pulling back rather than accelerating.
Broad-portfolio filer out front
The leading assignee's holding of 6,113 records is well ahead of fifth place at 826, showing a genuine gap at the very top of the ranking even though the combined top-5 share of the full record set is modest.
Cooling among established filers
Recent-year momentum data shows several of the more active historical assignees at zero filings in the latest year, with year-over-year drops of -100% for some and a -67% drop for another. This pattern is consistent with a field where the largest holders have already staked out their claim territory.
US-centred filing, with real EPO and PCT volume
The United States receives the largest single share of filings, followed by the European Patent Office and the WIPO PCT route, with meaningful volume also going through Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Sumitomo Metal Mining Co., Ltd. | 1 | -67% |
| Omya International AG | 1 | 0% |
| Procter & Gamble Co. | 0 | -100% |
| Elan Pharma International Limited | 0 | — |
| BASF SE | 0 | -100% |
| E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company | 0 | — |
| Alkermes Pharma Ireland Limited | 0 | — |
| FUJIFILM Holdings Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific next questions depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or spotting where to file next.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top holdings
With the leading assignee holding 6,113 records against a fifth-place figure of 826, any new filing in crystallization equipment or particle-size control should be checked against that leader's portfolio specifically, not just the aggregate field.
Run a freedom-to-operate checkTrack the momentum shift as 2025–2026 data fills in
Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the apparent slowdown after 2024 will firm up over the next reporting cycles — worth revisiting once those years are complete.
Set up a filing alertMap the white space chips against your own claims
The under-claimed branches identified here — residence-time control, in-line particle sizing, mother-liquor recycle — are starting points, not conclusions; each needs a targeted prior-art pull before drafting.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The ranking in this dataset is led by an assignee holding 6,113 of the 108,646 records in scope, a clear margin over the fifth-ranked company at 826. That said, the top five combined account for only 9.1% of all records, and the top ten for 12.3%, so no single company or small group controls the field. The remainder is spread across a long tail of companies filing far fewer records each, which matters for freedom-to-operate work: checking against the leader alone is not sufficient.
Filing volume peaked in 2019 at 807 records and has declined since, with complete-year data showing a drop from 756 records in 2021 to 447 in 2024 — a 41% fall over that span. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so the true recent trend will only become clear once those years fill in. Treat the current data as showing a field past its filing peak rather than one accelerating or flatlining.
The IPC composition data shows the largest single share, 4.2% of all records, classified under A61K (medicinal preparations), ahead of inorganic compounds, catalysis, separation processes, batteries, therapeutic compounds, crystal growth itself and other metal compounds, each in the 1.2–1.8% range. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares add up to more than the total record count, which is expected. The practical takeaway is that crystallization process claims are frequently filed as part of a pharmaceutical or materials product patent rather than as a standalone crystallization method.
The United States receives the largest share of filings at 8,561 records, followed by the European Patent Office at 4,543 and the WIPO PCT route at 2,327. Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom also carry meaningful volume. This distribution suggests the US and Europe remain the primary venues for contesting crystallization claims, with PCT filings used as a staging step into wider jurisdictions.
Relative to the overall size of the field, sub-areas such as continuous crystallizer residence-time control, in-line particle size distribution sensing, process-stream recycle for mother liquor, and equipment-scale-up modeling show thinner claim density than the crowded pharmaceutical-preparation and inorganic-compound classes. These are starting points for a targeted prior-art search, not a guarantee of openness — each would need its own clearance check before drafting a first claim. The general pattern in this dataset is that process-control and equipment-engineering claims are less saturated than product-composition claims.
Research Industrial Crystallization Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole industrial crystallization 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.