Book a demo

NMC Battery Formation Process Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026

NMC Battery Formation Process Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/nmc-battery-formation-process-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Battery & Energy Storage · Patent Landscape
NMC battery formation process patents: who is claiming SEI formation and aging protocols
  • Filing already peaked. 2018 recorded the high point of the dataset at 7 filings; by the 2022 midpoint activity had fallen to 2, and the trend has not recovered — this is a field that filed early and then went quiet.
  • Ownership is fragmented and mostly dormant. Every top-momentum assignee tracked shows zero filings in the latest year, including a -100% YoY drop for one; there is no single active leader to design around today.
  • One collaboration dominates co-filing. Of five co-assignee pairs identified, the TNO–Toyota link accounts for five joint filings — far ahead of any other pairing — pointing to a specific cross-border formation-science partnership worth tracking.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
26
Published Records
US
Leading Jurisdiction
11
Active Filers Ranked
2018
Peak Filing Year

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

NMC battery formation process patents cover the electrochemical conditioning step — SEI formation, aging protocols and formation-cycle chemistry — applied specifically to nickel-manganese-cobalt cathode systems. The search combines NMC-specific terminology with formation and aging process language, filtered to the core electrochemical-cell IPC classes (H01M10/44, H01M10/0525, H01M4/1391), so the set captures process patents rather than general cathode-material composition claims.

The dataset spans 2015 through the 2026 cut-off and contains 26 published records mapped to 26 patent families — a small, tightly scoped corpus rather than a broad battery-chemistry landscape. That size matters for how the findings should be read: rankings and trend lines here describe a niche, technically dense filing pocket, not a mass-market technology.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1PANASONIC HOLDINGS CORP10
  2. 2CHANGS ASCENDING ENTERPRISES CO LTD7
  3. 3TOYOTA JIDOSHA KK5
  4. 4NEDERLANDSE ORG VOOR TOEGEPAST NATUURWETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK TNO5
  5. 5TESLA INC3
  6. 6RIVIAN HOLDINGS LLC1
  7. 7GUANGDONG BRUNP RECYCLING TECH CO LTD1
  8. 8SAVEETHA ENG COLLEGE1
  9. 9HUNAN BRUNP RECYCLING TECH CO LTD1
  10. 10HONG KONG APPLIED SCI & TECH RES INST1
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology

Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.

10,000 free credits to start
The data

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 26-family dataset: how filing volume moved year over year, and where those filings sit across the IPC classification system.

Filing trend, 2017-2026

Filings opened slowly, spiked to a peak of 7 in 2018, then declined toward a flat 2 filings at the 2022 midpoint. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the final one or two years are understated, but the multi-year decline from the 2018 peak predates that lag effect.

Filing trend, 2017-2026024681201772018201920202021202220232024202512026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC subclass composition

Every record sits in H01M (batteries, cells & fuel cells), confirming the search scope. Secondary classes are thin: C01B (non-metallic elements & inorganic compounds) appears in 7 records, while B60K, B60L and C01G each appear in only 3 — a sign that formation-process claims here are rarely bundled with vehicle-integration or precursor-chemistry claims.

IPC subclass compositionH01M · Batteries, cells & fuel cells26100.0%C01B · Non-metallic elements & inorga…726.9%B60K · Vehicle propulsion & drive311.5%B60L · Electric vehicle propulsion311.5%C01G · Compounds of other metals311.5%

Shares are the percentage of the 26 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on NMC Battery Formation Process with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about nmc battery formation process and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key patents

Most-cited records and a representative filing

Representative filing
GB2617724A2023-10-18

GB2617724A — Lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide positive electrode material of high-performance power battery and preparation method therefor

GUANGDONG BRUNP RECYCLING TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.

Discloses a lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide positive electrode material and preparation method combining melt mixing, spray-drying, sol-gel and high-temperature solid-phase methods to produce a precursor with uniform particle size, strong electrochemical performance and high cycle stability, using a comparatively simple, low-cost process.Filed by Guangdong Brunp Recycling Technology Co., Ltd., published 2023-10-18.

GB2617724A — patent drawing 1
View full filing
Most-cited records in this dataset
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US20190036171A1Novel battery systems based on two-additive electrolyte systems19
2US20190280334A1Novel battery systems based on two-additive electrolyte systems including 1,2,6-oxodithiane-2,2,6,6-tetraoxide12
3US20240079587A1Composite cathodes for li-ion batteries5
4US20210175547A1Novel battery systems based on two-additive electrolyte system3

Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial relevance.

Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (4 of 4 rows); clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis

 
Where to run it
Fastest

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 →
For builders

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 →
Insights

What the numbers mean for strategy

Read together, the trend, citation pattern and co-filing structure point to a niche that filed hard once and has since gone quiet — with influence concentrated in a small cluster of electrolyte-additive patents.

Filing momentum
7 in 2018 → 2 by 2022
peak vs. midpoint filings

The wave already broke

Filing activity peaked in 2018 and has not returned to that level since. A midpoint of 2 filings in 2022 suggests the core formation-process approaches were staked out early rather than being actively contested now.

Trend data, 2017-2026
Citation concentration
19 citations on the top record
leading cited count

Influence sits in electrolyte-additive claims

The most-cited records in this set are two-additive electrolyte system patents, one drawing 19 citations and a related filing 12. That concentration flags where downstream filers have most often needed to cite around, even though citation counts favour older filings.

Most-cited records
Geographic filing
16 of 26 filed via USPTO
receiving office share

US-centric with a thin international tail

The United States accounts for 16 of the tracked filings, with Canada a distant second at 5 and Europe, the UK, Austria and India each contributing one or two. Formation-process protection outside North America remains sparse.

Receiving office data
Collaboration structure
5 co-assignee pairs identified
joint-filing relationships

One partnership drives most co-filing

TNO and Toyota co-appear on five filings, dwarfing every other pairing in the dataset, including single joint filings between Tesla and Panasonic, and between Hunan Brunp and Guangdong Brunp. Co-development in this space is the exception, not the norm.

Co-assignee pairs
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to nmc battery formation process, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players

Who holds ground, and where the gaps sit

No assignee in this dataset shows active filing in the latest tracked year, which changes how a competitive read should be framed: this is a map of who staked claims earlier, not who is racing today.

Momentum check
0 filings, latest year
across every tracked top assignee

The whole leaderboard has gone quiet

Every assignee with recent-year momentum data — including Toyota, TNO and both Tesla entities — recorded zero filings in the most recent tracked year, with one Tesla entity down -100% YoY. Treat rankings here as historical position, not current velocity.

Recent-year momentum
Collaboration
5 joint filings, TNO + Toyota
strongest co-assignee pair

A single cross-border partnership stands out

The Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research and Toyota jointly hold five filings — well ahead of any other pairing — suggesting a dedicated, sustained formation-science collaboration rather than incidental co-filing.

Co-assignee pairs
Recycling angle
2 related Brunp entities co-filing
Hunan Brunp + Guangdong Brunp

Recyclers are entering from the materials side

Guangdong Brunp's representative filing on NMC positive-electrode preparation, alongside a co-filing with its sister entity Hunan Brunp, shows recycling-adjacent players approaching formation-relevant chemistry from the precursor-material angle rather than the cell-formation angle.

Representative filing & co-assignee pairs
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas
Pockets within this landscape with thin current coverage relative to the core formation-process claims.
Formation-cycle voltage profiling for high-Ni NMCSEI additive combinations beyond two-additive systemsAging-protocol data feedback into formation controlPrecursor-to-formation process integrationCross-jurisdiction filing outside US/Canada
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Changyuan Group (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.0
Tesla Motors Canada ULC0
Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)0
Toyota Motor Corporation0
Tesla, Inc. (United States)0-100%
Nano and Advanced Materials Institute Limited0
Rivian IP Holdings LLC0
Hunan Brunp Recycling Technology Co., Ltd.0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next

Where to take this analysis

This landscape identifies where formation-process claims are dense and where they have gone quiet. The next step is testing a specific filing or design-around idea against the full claim text.

Check freedom-to-operate on a specific formation protocol

Run a targeted claim-chart comparison against the most-cited electrolyte-additive families before committing to a formation-cycle design.

Explore in Patsnap Eureka

Track the TNO-Toyota collaboration further

Pull the full family history behind the strongest co-assignee pair to see whether the partnership has moved into adjacent aging-protocol claims.

Explore in Patsnap Eureka

Monitor the under-claimed sub-areas for new entrants

Set alerts on the gate chips above — thin coverage today does not mean thin coverage next year, especially in aging-protocol data feedback.

Explore in Patsnap Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about NMC formation process patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on NMC Battery Formation Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research NMC Battery Formation Process in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole nmc battery formation process corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.