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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/nonionic-surfactant-production-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Fine ChemicalsNonionic Surfactant Production Patents: Who Holds the Ground
- Concentrated at the top. the top 5 assignees hold 60.4% of all 197 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 83.8% — this is a field with a short list of gatekeepers, not a long tail of small filers.
- Filing has cooled since 2018. the peak year was 2018 at 13 filings, the 2022 midpoint sits at just 2, and recent-year momentum for every major assignee tracked shows 0 filings, several at -100% YoY.
- Claim density sits almost entirely in one class. 93.4% of records carry a C11D detergent-composition classification, while adjacent polymer and mixing classes each account for well under 10% — that imbalance is where the white space is.
197
Published Records
60%
Top-5 Share of All Records
US
Leading Jurisdiction
62
Active Filers Ranked
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What the patent record shows about nonionic surfactant production
Nonionic surfactant production patents in this dataset cluster around two commercial routes: alcohol ethoxylate chemistry and alkyl polyglucoside chemistry, both claimed against detergent and cleaning-composition end uses rather than as standalone surfactant synthesis. The search scope pulls 197 records published between 2015 and 2026 that explicitly address ethoxylation degree distribution, cloud point, residual free alcohol, bio-based feedstock or catalyst residue — the process-control variables that separate a workable commercial batch from a lab curiosity. Most of the claim activity sits inside formulated end-products, not upstream synthesis, which shapes where freedom-to-operate risk actually concentrates.
Filing activity peaked in 2018 and has declined since, with the most recent full year showing no filings from any of the assignees tracked for momentum. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the last one to two years in any trend chart will understate real activity — treat the tail of the curve as incomplete rather than as evidence the field has stopped moving.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nonionic Surfactant Production 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 Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 197 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A peak in 2018, then a flat-to-declining trend
Filings ran at 6 in 2017 and reached a peak of 13 in 2018. By the 2022 midpoint, annual filings had fallen to 2, and the most recent year shows 0 — consistent with a maturing, formulation-focused field rather than an emerging one, though the newest year is always undercounted at this cut-off.
Claim density is concentrated in one detergent class
C11D (detergents and cleaning compositions) appears on 93.4% of the 197 records in scope, dwarfing every adjacent class. C08G (condensation polymers, 7.6%) and C09K (materials for miscellaneous applications, 7.1%) are the next largest, followed by C08F, B08B, B01F, C07C and A01N each in single digits — evidence that most claims are written around the finished cleaning composition, not the surfactant synthesis route itself.
Shares are the percentage of the 197 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 Nonionic Surfactant Production covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Nonionic Surfactant Production with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about nonionic surfactant production and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited records and a representative filing
Representative Filing
US20120040882A1 — sulfonated alkyl polyglucoside cleaning composition
ECOLAB USA INC.
The filing claims a cleaning composition built from a sulfonated functionalized alkyl polyglucoside — in C12, C10-C12 blend, or C10 form — combined with a co-surfactant, a water conditioning agent and water. The co-surfactant is specified as a C6-C12 alcohol ethoxylate with between 3 and 10 moles of ethylene oxide, and one embodiment is claimed as substantially free of alkyl phenol ethoxylates.Filed by Ecolab USA Inc., published 2012-02-16.
Most-cited records in the dataset
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4239659A | Detergent compositions containing nonionic and cationic surfactants, the cationic surfactant having a long al… | 674 |
| 2 | US20050101516A1 | Rinse aid composition and method of rising a substrate | 100 |
| 3 | US7279455B2 | Rinse aid composition and method of rising a substrate | 84 |
| 4 | US6121228A | Microemulsion light duty liquid cleaning compositions | 81 |
| 5 | US5665689A | Cleaning compositions comprising mixtures of partially esterified full esterified and non-esterfied ethoxylat… | 80 |
| 6 | US6110295A | Blooming type disinfecting cleaning compositions | 56 |
| 7 | US6627589B1 | Mild antibacterial liquid dish cleaning compositions containing peroxide having improved stability and stain … | 51 |
| 8 | US6030936A | Blooming type disinfecting cleaning compositions | 51 |
| 9 | US6821939B1 | Acidic light duty liquid cleaning compositions comprising a sultaine | 46 |
| 10 | US6048834A | Microemulsion light duty liquid cleaning compositions | 39 |
Citation counts reward older filings simply by virtue of time in the corpus; read them as a signal of influence on later drafting, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nonionic Surfactant Production 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
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 data means for strategy
Three read-outs from the filing pattern, concentration figures and technology mix that matter for a freedom-to-operate or whitespace assessment.
Concentration
60.4% top 5
of 197 records
A short list of gatekeepers, not a crowded field
The top 5 assignees combined hold 60.4% of all 197 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 83.8%. That is a steep concentration curve: a small number of established consumer-products and specialty-chemicals filers have built most of the claim coverage, leaving comparatively little space occupied by smaller or newer entrants.
Ranking covers 62 companies total.
Momentum
0 filings
latest year, all tracked assignees
Filing activity has gone quiet at the top
Every major assignee tracked for recent-year momentum shows 0 filings in the latest year, several down 100% year-on-year from their prior activity. Combined with a 2022 midpoint of just 2 filings against a 2018 peak of 13, the pattern reads as a field where the dominant players have largely stopped adding new claims — worth checking against publication lag before concluding the technology itself has stalled.
Peak year 2018: 13 filings.
Technology mix
93.4% C11D
of 197 records
Claims sit on the formulated product, not the synthesis
C11D detergent and cleaning-composition claims cover 93.4% of records, while classes tied to polymer chemistry (C08G, C08F) or general mixing and materials (C09K, B01F, B08B) each sit under 8%. Most patent protection in this dataset is written around end-use cleaning formulations rather than the upstream ethoxylation or glycosidation process itself.
Eight IPC subclasses represented overall.
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 nonionic surfactant production, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-filing is rare and narrow
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | Northwestern University | 6 |
| Henkel Corp. | PIPPIN WALLACE H | 2 |
| Henkel Corp. | NATALE MARCIE | 2 |
| Henkel Corp. | KLIMA RUDOLPH | 2 |
| Henkel Corp. | HOPKINS THOMAS R | 2 |
| Henkel Corp. | FEUSTEL DIETER | 2 |
| Henkel Corp. | FENG CHING | 2 |
| Ecolab Inc. | ZURBEY MATTHEW F | 1 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest pairing links a major chemicals filer with a research university — most other patenting here is done solo rather than through joint ventures or cross-licensing arrangements.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nonionic Surfactant Production 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 the claim space, and where it thins out
The ranking covers 62 companies total, counted by records in scope. The leader holds 40 records, fifth place holds 16, and tenth place holds 6 — a steep drop-off that defines both the risk and the opportunity in this field.
Leader
40 records
leading assignee
One filer well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 40 records, more than double the fifth-place holder's 16. Any new filing strategy in nonionic surfactant production needs to map its claims against this leader's coverage first, since it anchors the top-5 concentration figure on its own.
Leader alone exceeds combined 6th-10th place filers.
Mid-field
16 → 6
5th to 10th place
A fast drop from fifth to tenth place
Filing counts fall from 16 at fifth place to 6 at tenth place, then presumably thin further across the remaining 52 ranked companies. This is not a gentle long tail — it is a cliff, meaning the mid-field players each hold a defensible but narrow slice rather than broad platform coverage.
Top 10 combined: 83.8% of 197 records.
Jurisdictions
United States 57
receiving office filings
US and EPO dominate the filing venues
The United States receives the most filings (57), followed by Europe/EPO (33) and WIPO/PCT (25), with Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom each in double digits. That spread suggests the commercially relevant markets for freedom-to-operate checks are concentrated in North America and Europe rather than distributed globally.
Six receiving offices tracked.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Colgate-Palmolive Co. | 0 | — |
| Ecolab Inc. | 0 | — |
| Reckitt & Colman Inc. | 0 | — |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | 0 | -100% |
| Procter & Gamble Co. | 0 | -100% |
| RECKITT BENCKISER INC | 0 | — |
| Ecolab USA Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Henkel Corp. | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nonionic Surfactant Production 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 next
The landscape figures above answer what the field looks like today. The next questions are specific to a given product or filing strategy.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's claim set
With one assignee holding 40 of 197 records, any new formulation work in alcohol ethoxylate or alkyl polyglucoside chemistry should be checked against that filer's granted claims before development spend goes further.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for a first filing
Catalyst-residue and bio-based feedstock claims sit on thin IPC coverage relative to the C11D-heavy core. A first claim drafted around process-control variables rather than end-formulation may find open ground.
Explore whitespace in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nonionic Surfactant Production 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 nonionic surfactant production patents
The ranking covers 62 companies, and it is heavily front-loaded: the top 5 assignees combined hold 60.4% of all 197 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 83.8%. The leading assignee alone holds 40 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 16. In practice this means a small group of established consumer-products and specialty-chemicals companies control most of the claim coverage in this dataset, and any competitive assessment should start with that leader's portfolio rather than treating the field as fragmented.
Filing activity peaked in 2018 at 13 filings and has trended down since, with the 2022 midpoint at just 2 filings and the most recent tracked year showing 0 filings across every major assignee. Several of those assignees show -100% year-on-year change. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the very latest year in any dataset understates true activity, but the multi-year decline through the midpoint is a real signal that this field's claim space is being defended rather than expanded.
Both chemistries appear in the search scope, but the vast majority of records classify under C11D, meaning claims are written around the finished detergent or cleaning composition rather than the surfactant synthesis step itself. A representative example, US20120040882A1, combines a sulfonated alkyl polyglucoside with an alcohol ethoxylate co-surfactant in a single cleaning-composition claim — illustrating how the two chemistries are frequently claimed together as complementary ingredients rather than as competing standalone technologies.
The technology composition data shows a steep drop-off after the dominant C11D class: C08G condensation polymer claims sit at 7.6% of the 197 records, C09K materials claims at 7.1%, and process-oriented classes like B01F mixing and stirring at just 3.0%. That imbalance points to under-claimed ground in upstream process control — catalyst residue management, bio-based feedstock routes and reactor/mixing claims — rather than in further formulated end-product variations, which are already densely claimed.
The United States leads with 57 filings, followed by Europe/EPO at 33 and WIPO/PCT at 25; Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom each sit in double digits. This distribution indicates that the commercially contested jurisdictions for nonionic surfactant production are concentrated in North America and Europe, so a freedom-to-operate review should prioritise US and EPO filings first before extending to the smaller receiving offices.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nonionic Surfactant Production 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 Nonionic Surfactant Production in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole nonionic surfactant production 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.