Nanopore Sequencing Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees account for 49.2% of all 2,772 records in scope, and the top ten hold 62.4% — this field is not a level playing field.
- Filing has cooled from its peak. After peaking at 259 records in 2018, filings ran 250 in 2021 down to 201 in 2024, a 20% decline over that span, though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in.
- Bioinformatics claims are rising alongside chemistry. G16B bioinformatics classifications sit on 18.0% of records, alongside the dominant C12Q measuring/testing class at 78.2% — basecalling and signal-processing claims are no longer a side note.
Filing growth compares 2021 (250 records) with 2024 (201) — 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 2,772 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the nanopore sequencing patent record shows
Nanopore sequencing patenting spans two connected problems: getting a biomolecule through a pore in a controlled, readable way, and turning the resulting signal into accurate base calls. The search underlying this page combines both threads — protein nanopore and solid-state nanopore hardware claims, alongside translocation speed, basecalling accuracy, motor protein control and homopolymer error correction — across 2,772 records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026.
The dataset is dominated by a small number of assignees who filed early and kept filing, with a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants behind them. Reading the ranking, the trend and the IPC composition together tells a reader where claim space is already dense, where it has thinned out, and where a new filing would land in genuinely open ground rather than behind an incumbent's continuation chain.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,772-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran from 208 in 2017 to a peak of 259 in 2018, then eased to 250 in 2021 and 201 in 2024 — a 20% decline across that three-year window. 2025 and 2026 figures (24 in 2026) are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months; they should not be read as a continuation of the decline.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C12Q (measuring/testing involving enzymes or DNA) appears on 78.2% of the 2,772 records, with G01N (material analysis) on 34.9% and G16B (bioinformatics) on 18.0%. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% — they describe overlap, not a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,772 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Nanopore Sequencing with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about nanopore sequencing and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this corpus
Controlling fluorescent signal composition in optically-based nanopore sequencing
The filing describes an optically based nanopore sequencing method: a polynucleotide is translocated through a nanopore bore at a defined translocation speed while fluorescently labelled nucleotides are held quenched in free solution, then excited only as each label exits the pore and before it is quenched by a following label or agent. The approach substitutes optical readout timed to translocation for direct electrical current sensing.Abstract trimmed for length; full claim language is available in the source record.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20140174927A1 | Nanopore Sensors for Biomolecular Characterization | 591 |
| 2 | US20100331194A1 | Nanopore sequencing devices and methods | 442 |
| 3 | US20160319345A1 | Error suppression in sequenced DNA fragments using redundant reads with unique molecular indices (UMIS) | 441 |
| 4 | WO2009020682A2 | Chemical functionalization of solid-state nanopores and nanopore arrays and applications thereof | 355 |
| 5 | WO2016034591A2 | Mutant pores | 350 |
| 6 | US20120020537A1 | Data processing system and methods | 294 |
| 7 | US20080187915A1 | Systems and Methods for Controlling the Position of a Charged Polymer Inside a Nanopore | 241 |
| 8 | US20070190542A1 | Hybridization assisted nanopore sequencing | 232 |
| 9 | US20140080715A1 | Non-invasive determination of methylome of fetus or tumor from plasma | 230 |
| 10 | WO2010034018A2 | MSP nanopores and related methods | 224 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus skew toward older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — treat them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current commercial 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 →Reading the concentration and the technology mix together
The ranking, the trend and the IPC breakdown point to the same conclusion from different angles: early movers built a dense claim position around pore chemistry and signal detection, and later entrants have mostly filed around the edges.
A small group of assignees set the terms
The five leading assignees combined account for 49.2% of all 2,772 records in scope, rising to 62.4% across the top ten. That concentration is typical of a field where the founding hardware and chemistry patents were filed early and defended through continuations.
Volume has eased from its 2018 peak
Filings peaked at 259 records in 2018 and have since settled lower, running from 250 in 2021 to 201 in 2024. That is a cooling in raw volume, not necessarily in commercial interest — later years in any filing trend are always undercounted at the point of publication.
Enzymatic and DNA-measurement claims dominate
C12Q classifications sit on 78.2% of the 2,772 records, far ahead of G01N material-analysis claims at 34.9%. Bioinformatics classifications under G16B, at 18.0%, mark a smaller but distinct cluster of basecalling and signal-processing claims layered on top of the wet-chemistry base.
Joint filings cluster around a few institutional pairs
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and they are unevenly weighted: the strongest pairing links a university and a diagnostics company at a scale well above the others. Most assignees in this field file alone rather than jointly.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to nanopore sequencing, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the activity is thinning
The leader in this ranking holds 488 records; by fifth place that figure is down to 89, and by tenth place to 56 — a steep drop-off that marks the boundary between a small group of entrenched filers and a long tail of narrower players.
The top-ranked assignee's position
The leading assignee's 488 records dwarf the rest of the ranking; even fifth place holds only 89. This is the signature of a company that established core pore-sensing and sequencing-platform claims early and has kept extending them.
Concentration falls away quickly past the leaders
By the tenth-ranked assignee, the count is down to 56 records — a fraction of the leader's 488. Combined with the top-ten share of 62.4% of all records, this shows most of the remaining ranked entities hold comparatively small, specialised positions.
Momentum is mixed even among the leaders
Year-over-year filing changes among the most active assignees diverge sharply: some names are down more than 70% in the latest year, while at least one smaller filer is up 100% YoY off a low base. Momentum figures at this scale should be read as direction, not magnitude.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Guardant Health, Inc. | 9 | -78% |
| Oxford Nanopore Technologies Ltd | 3 | -73% |
| The Chinese University of Hong Kong | 2 | -50% |
| GRAIL, Inc. | 2 | +100% |
| Illumina, Inc. | 1 | -95% |
| University of Washington | 1 | 0% |
| Quantapore, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Center for Novostics | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or spotting where to file.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leaders
With the top ten assignees holding 62.4% of all 2,772 records, any new sequencing-platform or basecalling filing should be checked against their claim scope before drafting, not after.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches
Bioinformatics and lab-apparatus classifications carry meaningfully lower record shares than the core chemistry classes, which is where narrower, defensible claims are more likely to sit.
Run a white space search in EurekaTrack momentum, not just totals
Recent-year YoY swings among the most active assignees vary widely; watching who is accelerating versus pulling back is a better signal than the cumulative ranking alone.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions about nanopore sequencing patents
The assignee ranking in this dataset is led by a single company with 488 records, well ahead of the rest of the field — fifth place holds 89 and tenth place holds 56. The top five assignees combined account for 49.2% of all 2,772 records in scope, and the top ten reach 62.4%. That said, the ranking covers 100 companies rather than a narrow top tier, so there is meaningful depth below the leaders.
Filing peaked at 259 records in 2018 and has since eased, running from 250 records in 2021 down to 201 in 2024, a 20% decline over that span. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look lower still, but publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent one to two years are always undercounted at the point of measurement. The honest read is that volume has cooled from its peak rather than that the field is shrinking.
The dominant classification is C12Q, covering enzyme- and DNA-related measuring and testing, present on 78.2% of the 2,772 records in scope. Material analysis (G01N) appears on 34.9% and bioinformatics (G16B) on 18.0%, reflecting a growing layer of signal-processing and basecalling claims on top of the core wet-chemistry filings. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these percentages overlap rather than sum to 100%.
Relative to the dominant chemistry and platform classes, categories like bioinformatics-heavy homopolymer error correction, motor-protein translocation control, and lab-apparatus integration (B01L, C12M) carry lower record shares in this dataset. That does not guarantee an easy filing, since the leading assignees' portfolios can still reach into these areas, but it marks where claim density is comparatively thinner than in the core pore-chemistry space.
It is concentrated: the top five assignees hold 49.2% of all 2,772 records and the top ten hold 62.4%, with a sharp drop from 488 records at the leader down to 56 by tenth place. Below that, the ranking extends to 100 companies with a long tail of narrower, often single-purpose filers. Co-assignment is uncommon — only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and most assignees file independently.
Research Nanopore Sequencing in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole nanopore sequencing 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.