This dataset tracks 19 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that specifically combine mobile manipulator or arm-on-base robot terminology with whole-body or coupled base-arm motion planning language, within the core manipulator and control IPC classes. That is a narrow, purpose-built corpus rather than a count of every mobile robotics patent — broader searches on mobile manipulation alone would return a much larger number. Filing activity peaked at 4 families in 2019 and has not exceeded that since, through the 2022 midpoint of 4 and a near-empty most recent year, though the latest year is understated due to normal publication lag.

No single company holds a commanding share of this 19-family corpus; the assignee base includes Chinese universities such as Zhejiang University, South China University of Technology and Hainan University, Canada's University of Toronto, South Korea's Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, and several individual inventors. Every one of these assignees shows zero filings in the most recent tracked year, so leadership here is better read as historical concentration than current momentum. The most-cited single record, a 2017-era Chinese filing on vision-based grasping control, still anchors the citation graph but that reflects its age as much as ongoing influence.

Mobile manipulation broadly covers any robot combining a mobile base with a manipulator arm, including perception, grasping and task planning. Motion planning patents within that space, which is what this dataset isolates, specifically claim methods for computing collision-free or coupled base-and-arm trajectories — the algorithmic layer that decides how the robot moves, not what it perceives or grasps. This distinction matters for freedom-to-operate work because a product could clear mobile-manipulation prior art broadly while still infringing a narrowly drafted whole-body planning claim, or vice versa.

The receiving-office data shows China accounts for 10 of the 19 tracked families, with the United States at 6 and Canada, Japan and the WIPO/PCT route each appearing once. That concentration means the densest existing claim coverage — and the highest infringement risk for products sold or manufactured in China — sits in the Chinese filings. A team evaluating entry should prioritise a China-focused claim chart before assuming clearer freedom to operate in other jurisdictions, since the US and other regions currently carry lighter documented coverage in this specific niche.

The trend data suggests filing has plateaued rather than grown: activity rose to a peak of 4 families in 2019, held at 4 again by the 2022 midpoint, and shows no filings yet in the most recent tracked year. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, that final-year zero is likely understated rather than a true stop. Still, the absence of a clear upward trend across nearly a decade, combined with only two co-assignee pairs across all 19 families, points to a niche with modest and fragmented ongoing investment rather than an accelerating one.