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/surface-modification-and-texturing-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Surface EngineeringSurface modification and texturing patents: who holds the claim space and where it is still open
- 15.9% of the field sits with five companies. 1,920 of 12,069 records concentrate at the top, while a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants covers the rest of the ranked group.
- Filings fell 44% from 2021 to 2024. 401 records in 2021 dropped to 223 in 2024 — a real decline, not a publication-lag artefact, since both years are complete.
- Coatings dominate, but medical surfaces are close behind. C09D coating claims cover 30.5% of records; A61L sterilising and disinfecting claims cover 13.3%, pointing to a strong medical-device sub-current.
12.1K
Published Records
16%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-44%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (401 records) with 2024 (223) — 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 12,069 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset spans 12,069 published records filed between 2015 and 2026 that combine surface modification or texturing claims with language tied to coating composition, interface bonding or related processing terms. The scope pulls together two adjacent worlds: industrial coatings and laminates on one side, and medical-device surface treatment on the other. Both show up clearly in the technology composition, with C09D coatings and A61L sterilising/disinfecting among the most heavily claimed subclasses.
Filing activity peaked in 2018 at 443 records and has since declined, most reliably measured through 2024 given the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication. The assignee ranking is dominated by a handful of diversified materials and medical-device companies, with the leader alone accounting for 1,082 records — well ahead of the rest of the ranked group.
Filing activity and technology mix, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 12,069-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how records split across the IPC subclasses that define this space.
Filings declined after a 2018 peak
From 396 records in 2017, filings rose to a peak of 443 in 2018, then fell to 68 by 2026 (a partial year). The clearest complete-year comparison — 401 in 2021 down to 223 in 2024, a 44% drop — shows a genuine pull-back in new filings rather than a lag effect, since 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in and should not be read as confirming or denying the trend.
Coatings and medical surfaces lead the IPC mix
C09D (coatings, paints and inks) appears in 30.5% of records, the largest single subclass. A61L (sterilising and disinfecting) at 13.3% and A61K (medicinal preparations) at 8.8% together point to a substantial medical-device current running through this dataset, alongside the polymer-processing classes C08J, C08K and C08L that supply the base materials for both industrial and medical coatings. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares sum to well over 100% of the 12,069 records and should not be added together.
Shares are the percentage of the 12,069 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 Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about surface modification & texturing patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Representative filing and most-cited prior art
Representative record
Process for forming an Anti-fouling coating system (US20120237777A1)
PPG INDUSTRIES OHIO, INC.
Filed by PPG Industries Ohio, this record describes a process that first modifies a substrate surface, then applies a coating built on a perfluoropolyether-modified silane, followed by a controlled cure step that promotes hydrolysis of that silane component. The sequence ties surface preparation directly to the chemistry of the applied coating rather than treating them as independent steps.Published 2012-09-20; assigned to PPG Industries Ohio, Inc.
Most-cited records in this dataset
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20040167572A1 | Coated medical devices | 1,969 |
| 2 | US7108701B2 | Drug releasing anastomosis devices and methods for treating anastomotic sites | 1,779 |
| 3 | US5708247A | Disposable glucose test strips, and methods and compositions for making same | 1,631 |
| 4 | US8273404B2 | Extraction of solvents from drug containing polymer reservoirs | 1,352 |
| 5 | US7850982B2 | Biomaterial drug delivery and surface modification compositions | 1,352 |
| 6 | US6852122B2 | Coated endovascular AAA device | 1,339 |
| 7 | US8790684B2 | Vascular closure device | 1,309 |
| 8 | US7527632B2 | Modified delivery device for coated medical devices | 1,110 |
| 9 | US9510925B2 | Surgical meshes | 1,103 |
| 10 | US9889230B2 | Hemostatic implant | 1,067 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on the field, not as a measure of current relevance.
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 Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the records are grouped by assignee, geography and technology class.
Concentration
15.9%
of 12,069 records held by the top five
The top of the field is thin, the rest is a long tail
Five companies account for 1,920 of 12,069 records, and ten account for 2,649 — 21.9% of the total. That leaves the bulk of the ranked group holding much smaller shares each, which usually signals room for a well-drafted claim to stand out rather than a field locked up by a handful of players.
Based on the 100-company assignee ranking
Filing momentum
-44%
2021 to 2024 filing change
Complete-year data shows a real pull-back
Filings dropped from 401 in 2021 to 223 in 2024, a comparison built entirely on complete-year data. That is a meaningful signal of cooling investment in this specific claim space, distinct from the incomplete 2025-2026 figures which will rise as publications catch up.
Excludes 2025 and 2026, still filling in
Technology split
30.5%
of records classed under C09D
Coatings chemistry is the densest single claim area
C09D coverage at 30.5% of records makes it the single most crowded subclass, ahead of A61L sterilising and disinfecting at 13.3% and the polymer-processing classes clustered around 9-12% each. A filing strategy that leans on C09D alone is entering the most contested part of the map.
Shares sum above 100% because records carry multiple IPC classes
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 surface modification & texturing patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where the activity has stalled
The ranked assignees include diversified materials companies and medical-device specialists, but recent-year momentum across the group is notably flat.
Leader
1,082
records
One assignee well ahead of the ranked group
The leading assignee holds 1,082 records, more than six times the fifth-place total of 172. That gap is unusually wide and suggests a company with a long-running, broad filing programme across coating and surface-treatment chemistry rather than a single product line.
Compared against fifth place at 172 records
Momentum
-100%
YoY for several leading assignees
Recent-year filings have gone quiet across the leaders
Several of the most active historical assignees show zero filings in the latest tracked year, with year-over-year drops of -100% or -50% among others. Given the publication lag, some of this is an artefact of timing, but the pattern is consistent enough across multiple leaders to suggest a genuine slowdown in new claim activity from the incumbents.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Collaboration
10
co-assignee pairs identified
Co-filing is limited and concentrated around one company
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pairings all involve the same organisation working with named individual inventors. That points to a field where most patenting happens inside a single corporate entity rather than through joint filings or cross-company research agreements.
Strongest pairs share a common assignee
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. | 1 | -50% |
| 3M Innovative Properties Co. | 0 | -100% |
| Surmodics, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Cordis Corporation | 0 | — |
| BASF SE | 0 | -100% |
| Procter & Gamble Co. | 0 | — |
| ANGIOTECH INT AG (CH) | 0 | — |
| E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with a thin leadership group, declining recent filings, and technology concentrated in a few IPC subclasses. The next step is usually to narrow from the aggregate view to the specific claims that matter for a given product.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 1,082 records, any new coating or surface-treatment product should be checked against that portfolio specifically before checking the rest of the ranked group.
Run a freedom-to-operate search in Eureka →Track whether the 2021-2024 decline continues
The -44% drop from 2021 to 2024 is based on complete-year data; watching how 2023-2024 filings are revised as later publications land will confirm whether the pull-back is continuing.
Set up filing alerts in Eureka →Draft claims into the under-claimed branches
Interface bonding and anti-fouling cure chemistry show comparatively lower filing density than core C09D coating claims, which may leave room for a narrower, well-drafted claim.
Explore white space with Eureka →Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this patent landscape
The assignee ranking is led by one company holding 1,082 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 172. The top five combined account for 1,920 records, or 15.9% of the 12,069 records in scope, and the top ten reach 2,649 records, or 21.9%. Beyond that group, filing activity spreads across a long tail of companies each holding much smaller shares, so the field is concentrated at the very top but not tightly controlled overall.
Based on complete-year data, filings fell from 401 records in 2021 to 223 in 2024, a 44% decline. The peak year on record is 2018 at 443 filings, with a gradual decline since. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so those recent years should not yet be read as confirming or reversing the trend.
Coatings, paints and inks (IPC class C09D) is the largest single category, covering 30.5% of the 12,069 records in scope. Sterilising and disinfecting applications (A61L) follow at 13.3%, alongside several polymer-processing and composition classes each in the 9-12% range. Because a single patent record can carry multiple IPC classes, these percentages add up to more than 100% and should be read individually rather than summed.
Branches adjacent to the dominant coatings and medical-device clusters show comparatively lower filing density, including interface bonding at polymer-metal junctions, anti-fouling silane cure chemistry, and additive-driven surface texturing outside the core coating claims. These are not zero-filing areas, but they sit well behind C09D and A61L in density. A narrower claim targeting one of these specific mechanisms is more likely to clear existing prior art than a broad coating-composition claim.
Collaboration is limited: the dataset identifies only 10 co-assignee pairs across the entire scope. The strongest pairings all involve the same corporate assignee working alongside named individual inventors rather than another company, which suggests most patenting activity in this space happens inside single organisations rather than through joint ventures or cross-licensing filing arrangements.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Surface Modification & Texturing Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole surface modification & texturing patent landscape 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.