Silicone Release Coating Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Filing has flattened, not grown. annual filings peaked at 20 in 2018 and sat at 18 by the 2022 midpoint, with no sustained upward trend across the window.
- Claim activity clusters around a handful of related assignees. the strongest co-assignee pairing alone links 18 shared families, and several major filers show 0 activity in the latest recorded year.
- Europe outpaces the US as a filing venue. 123 EPO filings versus 100 US filings, with WIPO, Japan, Canada and China trailing behind.
What this landscape covers
Silicone pressure sensitive and release coatings sit at the intersection of coating chemistry and adhesive engineering: platinum-cure organopolysiloxane systems formulated to control release force, anchorage and migration on films and papers. This landscape draws on 397 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026, indexed against IPC classes spanning coatings, adhesives, polymer compositions and laminates.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent year in the trend chart understates real filing activity; treat 2025 and 2026 figures as provisional floors rather than final counts.
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
Annual filing counts and IPC distribution for the 397 families in this dataset, drawn directly from the underlying search.
A flat filing curve since the 2018 peak
Filings rose to a peak of 20 in 2018, eased back, and stood at 18 by 2022 — a pattern of a mature, saturated claim space rather than an expanding one. The partial 2026 count reflects publication lag, not a real drop-off.
Coatings and adhesive classes dominate
C09D (coatings, paints and inks) covers 320 of the 397 records and C09J (adhesives) covers 212, confirming this is fundamentally a coatings-and-adhesive-chemistry landscape. Secondary classes — C08G condensation polymers, C08K additives, B32B laminates and D21H paper compositions — mark where release-liner chemistry crosses into substrate and formulation engineering.
Shares are the percentage of the 397 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Silicone Pressure Sensitive and Release Coatings with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about silicone pressure sensitive and release coatings and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited prior art and a representative filing
WO2015196440A1 — Silicone release coating composition and low release force emulsion silicone release coating
The filing describes a silicone release coating composition and a low release force emulsion silicone release coating for films and papers, built from an organopolysiloxane fluid with defined viscosity and alkenyl content combined with a diorganopolysiloxane of higher viscosity and lower alkenyl content, targeting controlled release force on cured coatings.Abstract text is drawn directly from the published filing.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5082706A | Pressure sensitive adhesive/release liner laminate | 573 |
| 2 | US6806339B2 | Silicone release coating compositions | 203 |
| 3 | US4736048A | Pressure sensitive adhesive release liner and fluorosilicone compounds, compositions and method therefor | 178 |
| 4 | US4348454A | Ultraviolet light curable acrylic functional silicone compositions | 169 |
| 5 | US20070289495A1 | Silicone Release Coating Compositions | 161 |
| 6 | US5578381A | Release coating compositions | 138 |
| 7 | US5527578A | Radiation curable vinyl/silicone release coating | 121 |
| 8 | US9562149B2 | Silicone release coating compositions | 118 |
| 9 | US5712038A | Vibration damper material | 89 |
| 10 | US4968766A | Fluorosilicone compounds and compositions for adhesive release liners | 87 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to be cited within a searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current 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 →What the numbers say about this field
Three read-throughs from the filing trend, technology composition and citation data.
Growth has stalled, not accelerated
The peak year of 20 filings in 2018 was never exceeded; by the 2022 midpoint annual filings sat at 18, essentially flat. That pattern points to a claim space where the core chemistry is well staked out and new entrants are filing narrower, incremental improvements rather than foundational compositions.
Coatings claims outnumber adhesive claims
C09D coating-composition claims appear in 320 of 397 records against 212 for C09J adhesive claims, and 188 for C08L polymer-composition claims generally. Filers are more often claiming the release coating formulation itself than the adhesive laminate it is applied to.
Europe is the leading filing venue
EPO filings (123) edge out US filings (100), with WIPO PCT applications (45) a distant third. For counsel weighing where enforcement risk concentrates, European coverage in this field is at least as dense as US coverage, not secondary to it.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to silicone pressure sensitive and release coatings, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps are
Filing activity concentrates among a small group of related entities, several of which show no recorded filings in the latest year — a sign of either portfolio consolidation or a pause after earlier heavy claiming.
Filings cluster along corporate lines
The strongest co-assignee pairing in this dataset links 18 shared families between two related entities, with two further pairings at 7 and 6 shared families. Co-assignee counts this concentrated usually reflect joint ventures or internal corporate restructuring rather than arm's-length collaboration.
Major filers have gone quiet recently
Several of the most active historical assignees, including entities tied to Dow's silicone business and General Electric, show zero filings in the latest recorded year. Given the 18-month publication lag, some of this is an artefact of timing rather than an actual halt in R&D.
A small set of older filings still anchors the field
The most-cited record in this corpus, on pressure sensitive adhesive/release liner laminates, carries 573 citations — far ahead of the next most-cited filing at 203. New filers should expect examiners to cite this foundational work regardless of how narrow a new claim is.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Dow Silicones Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Dow (Shanghai) Investment Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| General Electric Company | 0 | — |
| Dow Corning Toray Silicone Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Avery Dennison Corporation | 0 | — |
| Dow Corning Taiwan Inc. | 0 | — |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company (USA) | 0 | — |
| Dow Corning Limited | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether you are scoping freedom-to-operate or looking for filing opportunities.
Map claim scope against the top-cited prior art
Before drafting in this space, check new claims against the highest-cited records identified here, particularly the pressure sensitive adhesive/release liner laminate family that anchors much of the later art.
Explore prior art in EurekaWatch for renewed activity from quiet assignees
Several leading filers show zero filings in the most recent year; given publication lag, renewed activity from these entities could surface within the next reporting cycle.
Track assignee activity in EurekaProbe the under-claimed branches directly
Bath-life extension, fluorosilicone anchorage and migration-resistant substrates show thinner claim density than the core coating classes and merit a dedicated search before filing.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about silicone release coating patents
Filing activity in this space concentrates among a small group of related entities tied to Dow's silicone business, rather than being spread evenly across the field. The strongest co-assignee pairing alone accounts for 18 shared families, which points to internal corporate structuring across affiliated filing entities rather than a wide field of independent competitors. General Electric and Avery Dennison also appear among the more active historical filers. Anyone assessing freedom-to-operate should look at affiliated-entity filing patterns, not just headline assignee names, since related companies often split filings across multiple registered entities.
No — filing activity peaked at 20 records in 2018 and had eased to 18 by the 2022 midpoint, showing a flat rather than growing trend across the 2015-2026 window. This pattern is more consistent with a mature, well-occupied claim space than an emerging one. Recent years show lower counts, but that partly reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication, so the true 2025-2026 filing rate is understated in current data.
In this dataset, C09D (coatings, paints and inks) covers 320 of 397 records while C09J (adhesives) covers 212, and many records carry both codes because a release liner patent often claims both the low-adhesion release coating and the adjacent pressure sensitive adhesive layer. Practically, release coating claims tend to focus on organopolysiloxane formulation, cure chemistry and release-force control, while adhesive coating claims focus on the anchorage and tack properties of the laminate. A single filing frequently covers both aspects because they are functionally paired in a release liner product.
WO2015196440A1, filed by Dow Corning (China) Holding, describes a silicone release coating composition and a low release force emulsion silicone release coating for films and papers, built around a specific combination of an organopolysiloxane fluid and a higher-viscosity diorganopolysiloxane, each defined by viscosity range and alkenyl content. The claims are anchored to specific compositional ratios and viscosity windows rather than to a broad functional outcome, which narrows what it can block. Anyone formulating a similar low-release-force system should check their alkenyl content and viscosity ranges against this filing's stated parameters before assuming freedom to operate.
The evidence points to several comparatively thin sub-areas relative to the dominant coating and adhesive classes: bath-life-extending catalyst inhibitor systems, fluorosilicone anchorage additives, migration-resistant paper substrates that overlap with D21H pulp-and-paper classification, and low-release-force emulsion systems specifically formulated for film substrates. These branches show up in the IPC composition and citation data as smaller, secondary clusters rather than as heavily claimed cores. A first filing in these areas would likely need to tie a specific formulation or process step to a measurable release-force or anchorage outcome to clear the existing prior art.
Research Silicone Pressure Sensitive and Release Coatings in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole silicone pressure sensitive and release coatings 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.