Rare Earth Polishing Powders Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
- Concentrated at the top. The top 5 assignees account for 50.0% of all 16 records in scope, and the top 10 reach 81.3% — a small group holds most of the documented filing activity.
- Filing has cooled since 2018. Activity peaked at 3 records in 2018; by the 2022 midpoint it had dropped to 2, and the trend has not recovered since.
- One IPC class dominates the claim space. C09G (polishing compositions) appears in 87.5% of the 16 records, while C01F rare-earth compound chemistry sits at just 31.3% — composition-of-matter claims look comparatively open.
A small, China-concentrated field with a narrow claim focus
Rare earth polishing powder patenting is a small, tightly scoped field: 16 published records span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, all originating from Chinese receiving offices. The search string ties together cerium oxide polishing powder, rare earth polishing and glass polishing slurry claims against removal rate, surface roughness, particle size distribution, slurry recycling and scratch-defect language — a set of claims aimed squarely at optical glass, silicon wafer and display-panel finishing. Most activity sits inside a single IPC subclass, which tells a filer more about where the crowd is than about how mature the underlying chemistry actually is.
Filing volume is thin enough that any single applicant's activity moves the whole trend line, and publication lag means the most recent year understates real filing activity. Read the concentration and trend figures as directional signals for a niche, not as evidence of a saturated technology.
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
Sixteen records, one receiving office, and a filing curve that has not returned to its 2018 peak — the numbers below set the scale for everything else on this page.
Filing activity, 2017–2026
Filings opened at 1 in 2017, rose to a peak of 3 in 2018, and had fallen back to 2 by the 2022 midpoint. The 2026 figure of 0 reflects the publication lag at the data cut-off rather than a stop in filing.
IPC subclass distribution
C09G (polishing compositions) covers 87.5% of the 16 records, far ahead of C01F rare-earth compound chemistry at 31.3%, B82Y nanotechnology applications at 12.5% and C09K misc.-application materials at 12.5%. Records can carry more than one class, so these shares add up past 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 16 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Rare Earth Polishing Powders with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about rare earth polishing powders and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
CN104387989A — high-density rare earth carbonate high-temperature bursting method for ultrafine high-cerium rare earth polishing powder
Filed by Nanchang University in 2015, this record describes a two-stage thermal process: bursting decomposition of high-density rare earth carbonate at 900-950°C for 10-60 minutes, followed by a 900-1050°C hold for 2-6 hours, then classification to yield an ultrafine rare earth oxide polishing powder with controlled D50 particle size between 100nm and 300nm.The claimed process targets optical glass, silicon wafer and display-screen polishing, with the specification citing particular advantage in magnetorheological finishing of large optical glass.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CN103361030A | 一种含镨超细高精密度稀土抛光粉及其制备方法 | 22 |
| 2 | CN102936461A | 一种富铈稀土抛光粉及其制备方法 | 19 |
| 3 | CN102850938A | 一种球型复合稀土抛光粉的制备方法 | 18 |
| 4 | CN114539928A | 一种用于光学玻璃抛光处理的稀土抛光粉及其制备方法 | 4 |
| 5 | CN117887356A | 一种氧化铈抛光液的制备方法 | 3 |
| 6 | CN109111855A | 一种镧铈镨钕钇稀土抛光粉及其制备工艺 | 2 |
| 7 | CN109897552A | 一种镧铈稀土抛光粉的制备方法 | 2 |
| 8 | CN104387989A | 高密度碳酸稀土高温爆裂法制备超细高铈稀土抛光粉的方法 | 2 |
| 9 | CN117361602A | 掺杂稀土离子的单分散球形二氧化铈纳米颗粒的制备方法 | 1 |
Ranked by citation count within this searched corpus; older records accumulate more citations by virtue of age, so treat this as a signal of influence rather than current importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (9 of 9 rows); 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 a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the concentration, trend and class figures are read together: a thin field, a stalled trend line, and a claim space that clusters heavily on formulation rather than the underlying rare-earth chemistry.
A handful of filers hold most of the ground
With the top 5 assignees covering 50.0% of all 16 records and the top 10 reaching 81.3%, this is a field where a small set of institutional filers set the terms. The tail beyond that point is thin — several assignees show a single filing.
Growth has flattened, not accelerated
Filing activity peaked at 3 records in 2018 and had eased to 2 by the 2022 midpoint. None of the tracked assignees show positive year-over-year momentum in the latest year, and one shows a -100% YoY drop.
Formulation claims dominate over base chemistry
C09G polishing-composition claims appear in 87.5% of records, while C01F rare-earth compound chemistry sits at 31.3%. That gap suggests the underlying rare-earth compound synthesis routes carry less claim density than the finished polishing formulations built on top of them.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to rare earth polishing powders, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the door is still open
Institutional and university filers dominate the ranked list, with the leader holding 3 records and the field dropping to single filings by the tenth position. That shape — a short concentrated head and a long single-filing tail — is typical of a niche materials technology still being worked out in a handful of labs.
The leader sits at 3 records, not a runaway share
The top-ranked assignee holds 3 of the 16 records in scope. That is enough to lead a small field but not enough to foreclose it — a well-differentiated formulation or process claim still has room to register.
A short list, not a crowded one
Only 13 companies appear across the full ranking the data endpoint returns. Several are Chinese universities and research institutes rather than commercial polishing-material producers, which points to a field still moving from lab process work toward commercial scale.
No assignee shows fresh momentum
Every tracked assignee in the recent-year momentum data shows 0 filings in the latest year, and one shows a -100% year-over-year decline. Read this alongside the publication lag: it likely understates real activity rather than confirming a stop.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Nanchang University | 0 | — |
| Inner Mongolia University of Science & Technology | 0 | — |
| Xi'an Rare Metal Materials Institute Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Gansu Rare Earth New Materials Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Wang Xianping | 0 | — |
| Shenzhen Ruilai Rare Earth Materials Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Wang Tiaoying | 0 | — |
| Jiangsu Ligang Rare Earth Materials Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a small, formulation-heavy field with room in adjacent process and chemistry claims. The next steps depend on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate or identifying a filing gap.
Map the full claim scope of the leading assignees
With the leader holding only 3 of 16 records, a claim-by-claim read of that portfolio against your own formulation is worth the time before assuming a blocking position exists.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest white space in rare-earth compound synthesis
C01F compound-chemistry claims sit at 31.3% of records against 87.5% for polishing-composition claims — a gap that may reflect genuine synthesis-route white space rather than a saturated area.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about rare earth polishing powder patents
This dataset, built from a search string combining cerium oxide polishing powder, rare earth polishing and glass polishing slurry terms against removal rate, surface roughness and particle size distribution claim language, returns 16 published records between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off. All 16 originate from Chinese receiving offices. That is a small field compared with adjacent materials categories, so any single new filing or grant can shift the trend meaningfully. Treat this as a scoped count tied to the specific search terms, not a universal total for every rare-earth abrasive patent worldwide.
The ranked list covers 13 assignees, the entire set the data endpoint returns for this search — not a top-50 or top-100 cut. The leading assignee holds 3 of the 16 records, with the top 5 combined accounting for 50.0% of all records and the top 10 reaching 81.3%. The list is a mix of Chinese universities, research institutes and materials companies, which suggests the field is still largely worked out in academic and applied-research settings rather than dominated by a single commercial producer.
Filing activity peaked at 3 records in 2018 and had eased to 2 by the 2022 midpoint, with no tracked assignee showing positive momentum in the latest year. One assignee shows a -100% year-over-year decline in recent filings. Because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, the most recent year in any patent trend understates real activity, so the apparent 2026 drop-off should not be read as a confirmed stop. On balance, the visible trend is flat to declining rather than growing.
C09G polishing-composition claims cover 87.5% of the 16 records, while C01F rare-earth compound chemistry claims sit at just 31.3%, and B82Y nanotechnology and C09K materials-for-misc.-applications each cover 12.5%. That gap between finished-formulation claims and base rare-earth compound synthesis claims points to underclaimed territory in the compound-chemistry and process-control space, including slurry recycling, fine particle-size control and scratch-defect mechanisms, rather than in the polishing composition itself.
High citation counts within a searched corpus signal influence on later filings, but they favour older records simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations — they are not a direct measure of current commercial importance or enforceability. A patent like CN103361030A being the most-cited record in this set means later filers frequently referenced it, which is worth reading closely for claim scope, but a freedom-to-operate assessment still requires checking current legal status, jurisdiction and claim construction rather than relying on citation rank alone.
Research Rare Earth Polishing Powders in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole rare earth polishing powders 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.