Lithium-Sulfur Battery Coating Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
- Filing has already peaked. 2018 remains the high-water mark at 38 families; by the 2022 midpoint annual filing had fallen to 21, and the trend has not recovered since.
- Claim activity is almost entirely batteries, not coatings. 224 of 226 families sit in H01M, versus just 8 in B05D coating processes proper — the coating step is claimed as part of the cell, rarely as its own process.
- Momentum has stalled across every tracked assignee. Every named assignee in the recent-year momentum data shows zero filings in the latest year, several with a -100% year-on-year drop.
Filing growth compares 2021 (24 records) with 2024 (21) — 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 226 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 226 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine lithium-sulfur (or Li-S) battery chemistry with claims on sulfur cathode coating, slurry coating process, or electrode fabrication process. The search string deliberately pairs a chemistry term with a process term, so the corpus captures how coating and fabrication steps are actually claimed inside battery patents rather than as standalone materials-science filings.
Filing is concentrated in the United States (124 records) and Europe via EPO and WIPO PCT routes (73 combined), with a smaller but consistent presence in Germany and India. Publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the tail end of the trend understates real recent activity — but even allowing for that, the pattern since the 2018 peak points to consolidation rather than expansion.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 226-family corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A peak in 2018, then a plateau
Annual filings rose to 38 in 2018, then settled into a lower band; the 2022 midpoint of 21 sits well below peak, and the most recent partial year (2026) has not yet recorded a published family — consistent with the usual 18-month publication lag rather than an actual stop in filing.
Coating claims live inside battery claims
H01M (batteries, cells & fuel cells) covers 224 of 226 families, meaning almost every filing frames its coating or fabrication step as part of a cell or electrode claim. B05D (coating processes as a distinct discipline) appears in only 8 families, and materials-adjacent subclasses such as C01B, C08F and D04H register in single digits — the process itself is rarely the primary claim target.
Shares are the percentage of the 226 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Lithium-Sulfur Battery Electrode Coating Process with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about lithium-sulfur battery electrode coating process and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
High Density Lithium-Sulfur Batteries (US20250286075A1, TDA Research)
The filing claims a lithium metal anode paired with a sulfur cathode built from a carbon/sulfur composite: a carbon core, an activated carbon support with pores sized 2-70 nm and a pore volume of 0.64-1.54 mL/g, sulfur species loaded into those pores, and a lithium-conducting polymer membrane encapsulating the whole structure. The membrane is built from a surfactant that forms an isotropic cubic phase, preferably bi-continuous.Filed 2025-09-11 — one of the most recent published families in this corpus.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20030082448A1 | Active material for battery and method of preparing the same | 150 |
| 2 | US20120048729A1 | Electrically non-conductive materials for electrochemical cells | 145 |
| 3 | US20180294476A1 | Lithium Metal Secondary Battery Containing an Anode-Protecting Polymer Layer and Manufacturing Method | 114 |
| 4 | US20170207484A1 | Alkali Metal-Sulfur Batteries Having High Volumetric and Gravimetric Energy Densities | 114 |
| 5 | US20180301707A1 | Lithium Anode-Protecting Polymer Layer for a Lithium Metal Secondary Battery and Manufacturing Method | 103 |
| 6 | US6878487B2 | Active material for battery and method of preparing same | 98 |
| 7 | US20030049529A1 | Active material for battery and method of preparing same | 92 |
| 8 | US20190165365A1 | Anode Particulates or Cathode Particulates and Alkali Metal Batteries Containing Same | 81 |
| 9 | US20190051905A1 | Anode-Protecting Layer for a Lithium Metal Secondary Battery and Manufacturing Method | 78 |
| 10 | US20150188194A1 | Electrically non-conductive materials for electrochemical cells | 67 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply by virtue of longer exposure; treat this as a map of historical influence, not current relevance.
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 read-throughs from the trend and composition data above, framed for someone deciding where to file next.
Growth has already flattened
Annual filings have not returned to the 2018 peak of 38 in any subsequent year, and the 2022 midpoint of 21 confirms a real slowdown rather than noise. The apparent drop to zero in the final year is partly a publication-lag artefact, but the multi-year decline before it is not.
Coating is claimed as part of the cell
Only 8 families sit in B05D, the dedicated coating-process subclass. Most applicants fold the coating or slurry step into a broader electrode or cell claim, which means process-only claims are comparatively rare prior art to search against.
US-first filing dominates
The United States accounts for over half of all receiving-office records, with Europe (EPO) and WIPO PCT together covering most of the remainder. Germany and India appear as secondary but consistent filing destinations.
No assignee shows recent-year growth
Every assignee in the recent-year momentum data recorded zero filings in the latest tracked year, with several showing a -100% year-on-year change from the prior year. This is consistent with the corpus-wide plateau rather than any single company retreating.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to lithium-sulfur battery electrode coating process, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds ground, and where the field is still open
The assignee ranking is dominated by a small set of repeat filers, with co-assignment patterns showing where academic and corporate research has paired up.
The strongest co-assignee pair in the dataset
This individual pairing outweighs any corporate co-assignee pair in the corpus, appearing across 6 shared families — a pattern typical of a small inventor team filing consistently under related corporate vehicles.
A recurring university collaboration
LG Energy Solution's pairing with the University of California Regents across 4 families is the strongest academic-corporate link in the corpus, suggesting sponsored or licensed research feeding directly into filed claims.
Even the largest filers have gone quiet
LG Energy Solution and Honeycomb Battery Co both show a -100% year-on-year change alongside zero filings in the latest tracked year — the same plateau visible corpus-wide, not isolated to smaller players.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Nanotek Instruments | 0 | — |
| LG Energy Solution | 0 | -100% |
| Samsung SDI | 0 | — |
| Global Graphene Group | 0 | — |
| HONEYCOMB BATTERY CO | 0 | -100% |
| Maxwell Technologies | 0 | — |
| The Regents of the University of Michigan | 0 | — |
| GM Global Technology Operations LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The trend and composition data point to a mature, consolidating field with narrow but real gaps. Two directions make sense depending on what you're deciding.
Scope a freedom-to-operate search
With 224 of 226 families sitting in H01M, a standalone coating-process claim is far less crowded than a cell-level claim. Use the B05D and C01B subclasses as a starting search set before assuming the space is blocked.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaWatch for renewed filing after the lag window
The apparent drop to zero in the final tracked year is partly a publication-lag effect. Recheck this trend in 12-18 months before concluding the field has genuinely gone quiet.
Track this landscape in Patsnap EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
No, not on this evidence. Filing peaked in 2018 at 38 families and had already fallen to 21 by the 2022 midpoint, with every tracked assignee showing zero filings in the most recent year. Some of that final-year drop is a publication-lag artefact, since publication typically trails filing by around 18 months, but the multi-year decline before it reflects a real slowdown rather than a data gap. Anyone entering this space now is filing into a plateaued, not a rising, field.
The United States is the dominant receiving office with 124 records, followed by Europe through the EPO (40) and WIPO PCT route (33) combined. Germany and India each show smaller but consistent volumes, and Austria appears at a much lower level. This distribution suggests the US is the primary market applicants prioritise, with Europe as the secondary but still significant filing region.
Based on the IPC composition, most applicants do not claim it that way: 224 of 226 families sit in H01M (batteries, cells and fuel cells), while only 8 sit in B05D, the subclass dedicated to coating processes as a distinct discipline. That imbalance means dedicated slurry-coating or fabrication-process claims are comparatively rare prior art, which can work in favour of a well-drafted standalone process claim rather than a bundled cell claim.
The dataset's co-assignee data shows the strongest linkage is between individual inventors Zhamu Aruna and Jang Bor Z across 6 shared families, alongside a notable academic-corporate pairing between LG Energy Solution and the University of California Regents across 4 families. Recent-year momentum data shows these and other named assignees, including Honeycomb Battery Co and Samsung SDI, all recorded zero filings in the latest tracked year, several with a -100% year-on-year change.
This TDA Research filing, published 2025-09-11, claims a lithium metal anode with a sulfur cathode built from a carbon/sulfur composite featuring precisely specified pore volume (0.64-1.54 mL/g) and pore diameter (2-70 nm) ranges, encapsulated in a lithium-conducting polymer membrane with a specified cubic-phase surfactant structure. The narrow, quantitatively bounded claims suggest applicants are now differentiating on precise pore architecture and membrane chemistry rather than broad compositional claims, which is typical of a field where the broad claim space is already occupied.
Research Lithium-Sulfur Battery Electrode Coating Process in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole lithium-sulfur battery electrode coating process 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.