Protein Chromatography Gradient Elution Patents: Top Filers & Trends 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The five most active filers hold 28.1% of all 13,035 records in scope, and the top ten hold 34.5% — the rest is a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants.
- Filing has cooled from its 2020 peak. Activity peaked at 241 records in 2020; the complete-year comparison shows filings down 43% from 191 in 2021 to 108 in 2024.
- Separation-process claims are the thinnest layer. B01D (separation processes) covers only 16.6% of records against 72.8% for C07K peptide claims — most of the crowding sits in the molecule, not the separation step itself.
Filing growth compares 2021 (191 records) with 2024 (108) — 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 13,035 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 13,035 published records at the intersection of affinity and chromatographic purification methods — protein A chromatography, elution gradient control, buffer pH and salt-concentration strategies, peak resolution and pool collection — filed against IPC classes covering separation processes, peptide chemistry and enzyme production. It spans filings from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, though publication lag means the most recent one to two years are still filling in.
The records split unevenly between the biology being purified and the separation step used to purify it. Peptide and microorganism engineering classes dominate the corpus, while dedicated separation-process claims under B01D remain a comparatively narrow slice — a gap worth checking before assuming a gradient-elution method is already well covered.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 13,035 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings rose from 189 in 2017 to a peak of 241 in 2020, then eased to 108 by 2024 — a 43% decline over the 2021-to-2024 window that data-cut confirms as complete. 2025 and 2026 figures will rise as publication catches up, so treat the tail as a floor, not a trend.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C07K (peptides and proteins) and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) each cover more than seven in ten records, reflecting how tightly purification claims are bundled with the biologic itself. B01D, the separation-process class most directly tied to gradient elution hardware and method, covers 16.6% of records — the smallest share of the eight subclasses tracked, and a signal of where method-level claim space is least occupied.
Shares are the percentage of the 13,035 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Protein Chromatography Gradient Elution with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about protein chromatography gradient elution and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
CA2995385A1 — Purification of FKBP-type peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase (FkpA) and uses for recombinant polypeptide production
The application describes methods for producing FkpA polypeptides at very high purity and for purifying other polypeptides, including multispecific antibodies, made in bacteria that overexpress chaperones such as FkpA. The purification route combines affinity chromatography, mixed-mode chromatography and hydrophobic interaction chromatography, with the resulting ultrapure FkpA used in immunoassays to confirm its removal from bacterially produced biologics.Filed by Genentech, Inc., dated 2017-02-23.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5641870A | Low pH hydrophobic interaction chromatography for antibody purification | 4,432 |
| 2 | US4769061A | Inhibition resistant 5-enolpyruvyl-3-phosphoshikimate synthase, production and use | 2,191 |
| 3 | WO2000060060A2 | Polypeptides having alkaline alpha-amylase activity and nucleic acids encoding same | 2,067 |
| 4 | US4667025A | Oligonucleotide derivatives | 1,864 |
| 5 | US4789737A | Oligonucleotide derivatives and production thereof | 1,742 |
| 6 | WO2005052146A2 | Serine proteases, nucleic acids encoding serine enzymes and vectors and host cells incorporating same | 1,591 |
| 7 | WO2002010355A2 | Alpha-amylase mutants with altered stability | 1,587 |
| 8 | US6946292B2 | Cells producing antibody compositions with increased antibody dependent cytotoxic activity | 1,044 |
| 9 | US4535060A | Inhibition resistant 5-enolpyruvyl-3-phosphoshikimate synthetase, production and use | 1,039 |
| 10 | WO2002099091A2 | Endo-beta-1,4-glucanase from bacillus | 935 |
Citation counts reflect a corpus skewed toward older filings; treat them as a measure of influence on later work, not as a ranking of present-day importance.
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 filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once records are grouped by assignee, year and IPC class.
A narrow group holds a disproportionate share
The five most active assignees account for 28.1% of all records in scope, and the ranked ten reach 34.5%. That leaves roughly two-thirds of the corpus spread across a long tail of occasional filers — a structure typical of a field with a handful of platform holders and many single-application entrants.
Filing volume has pulled back from its 2020 peak
After peaking at 241 records in 2020, filings fell across the last complete comparison window, from 191 in 2021 to 108 in 2024. The 2025–2026 counts are not yet comparable given publication lag, so this decline should be read as the most recent reliable signal, not the end of the story.
Separation-process claims are the least crowded layer
Peptide (C07K) and microorganism engineering (C12N) classes each appear in over 70% of records, but dedicated separation-process claims under B01D appear in only 16.6%. Method-level gradient elution and buffer-control claims sit on a thinner base than the biologic claims layered on top of them.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to protein chromatography gradient elution, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| ROSEN CRAIG A | RUBEN STEVEN M | 190 |
| aTyr Pharma, Inc. | Pangu Biopharma Limited | 178 |
| ROSEN CRAIG A | BARASH STEVEN C | 168 |
| RUBEN STEVEN M | BARASH STEVEN C | 167 |
| Human Genome Sciences, Inc. | ROSEN CRAIG A | 133 |
| Human Genome Sciences, Inc. | RUBEN STEVEN M | 131 |
| Human Genome Sciences, Inc. | BARASH STEVEN C | 128 |
| The Scripps Research Institute | The Regents of the University of California | 59 |
Co-assignee pairing is limited in this corpus — 10 pairs recorded — with the strongest pairing appearing 190 times, suggesting most purification method claims are filed by a single assignee rather than jointly developed.
Who is filing, and where activity has cooled
Filing leadership sits with a small set of biologics developers and research institutes; recent-year momentum has slowed even among the largest historical filers.
One filer dominates the ranked field
The leading assignee holds 2,508 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 249 and the tenth at 144 — a steep drop-off that marks this as a field with one dominant platform holder rather than several evenly matched competitors.
Recent-year activity has gone quiet among historical leaders
Several of the most historically active assignees, including major pharmaceutical and research-institute filers, show zero records in the latest tracked year, with at least one recording a full year-on-year drop. This is consistent with the broader 2021–2024 pullback rather than any single company's retreat.
Joint filings are rare and concentrated
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in this corpus, and the strongest pairing recurs 190 times. Co-filing is not how most of this field's claim space gets built — it is largely single-assignee territory.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG | 1 | — |
| Genentech, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Human Genome Sciences, Inc. | 0 | — |
| The Scripps Research Institute | 0 | — |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| aTyr Pharma, Inc. | 0 | — |
| ROSEN CRAIG A | 0 | — |
| RUBEN STEVEN M | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to a few concrete next steps for teams working on purification method claims.
Check the separation-process layer before filing
With B01D coverage at only 16.6% of records against 70%-plus for the biologic classes, a freedom-to-operate check on the method step specifically — rather than the molecule — is likely to surface less prior art than expected.
Explore method-level claims in EurekaTrack the leader-to-long-tail gap
With the top five holding 28.1% of records and a long tail making up the rest, watch for new entrants filing single applications in the under-claimed sub-areas rather than competing directly with the platform holder.
Run an assignee-level search in EurekaRevisit trend conclusions after 2026 data settles
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent slowdown into 2025 and 2026 should be re-checked once those years are complete, using 2024 as the last reliable comparison point.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
One assignee leads the ranked field with 2,508 records, far ahead of the fifth-place holder at 249 and the tenth at 144. The top five assignees combined hold 28.1% of all 13,035 records in scope, and the top ten hold 34.5%, which means the remaining two-thirds of the field is spread across a long tail of companies and institutes filing only occasionally. This concentration pattern is typical of fields anchored by one or two platform biologics developers alongside many single-application entrants.
Filing activity peaked at 241 records in 2020 and has declined since, falling 43% from 191 records in 2021 to 108 in 2024 — the most recent year that can be treated as a complete comparison point. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still artificially low because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so they should not yet be read as a continuation of the decline. Based on the complete-year data, the honest read is a pullback from a 2020 peak rather than a field in freefall.
C07K (peptides and proteins) and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) each appear in more than seven in ten of the 13,035 records, reflecting how closely purification claims are tied to the biologic being purified. A61K and C12P each cover a little under half of records, and B01D — the class most directly tied to separation-process and gradient-elution hardware — covers only 16.6%. Because records often carry multiple classes, these shares add up to well over 100%, and should be read as coverage rates, not as a breakdown that sums to the whole.
The clearest signal is the gap between the biologic-purification classes and the separation-process class: B01D sits at 16.6% of records versus 72.8% for C07K, suggesting method-level gradient control, buffer formulation and pool-collection sensing claims are less crowded than claims on the molecules being purified. Sub-areas such as real-time pool-collection cut-point sensing, salt-concentration ramping for viral clearance, and continuous chromatography buffer formulation show thinner density in this corpus. Any first claim aimed at these branches should be checked against the leading assignee's portfolio first, given its outsized share of the ranked field.
CA2995385A1, filed by Genentech in February 2017, covers methods for producing very high-purity FkpA (a peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase) and for purifying other bacterially produced polypeptides, including multispecific antibodies, using a combination of affinity chromatography, mixed-mode chromatography and hydrophobic interaction chromatography. It also claims the use of ultrapure FkpA in immunoassays to demonstrate its removal from the final biologic. Anyone purifying chaperone-overexpressing bacterial products with a similar combined chromatography sequence should review this filing's specific claim scope before designing a purification train.
Research Protein Chromatography Gradient Elution in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole protein chromatography gradient elution 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.