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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (14 records) with 2024 (4) — 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 335 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Syngas fermentation converts CO, CO2 and H2 into ethanol, acetic acid and other products using acetogenic microorganisms, and the rate-limiting step is almost always getting gas into the liquid phase fast enough to feed the microbes. This landscape isolates the subset of syngas and gas fermentation patents that specifically claim mass transfer, bubble size, gas holdup, sparger design, transfer coefficients or liquid circulation — the engineering layer that sits underneath the microbiology and determines whether a bioreactor design can scale past bench volume. It draws on 335 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 and classified under the core fermentation and bioreactor IPC codes.
The scope deliberately excludes patents on strain engineering or downstream product separation that do not also touch gas-liquid transfer mechanics, so the picture here is narrower than the full syngas fermentation field but sharper on the apparatus and process-control claims that decide reactor economics.
Two views of the same 335 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filings peaked at 38 records in 2017 and have not returned to that level since. The 2021-to-2024 window shows a 71% drop, from 14 records down to 4 — a real decline in disclosed filing activity within a period the data treats as complete, not an artifact of publication lag. Counts for 2025 and 2026 will keep rising as later filings publish, so treat the most recent one or two years as incomplete rather than as confirmation the field has gone quiet.
C12P fermentation and enzymatic synthesis claims touch 95.5% of the 335 records, which is expected given the search scope. What stands out is C12M bioreactor and apparatus hardware at 48.4% and C12N microorganism/genetic engineering at 39.7% — both filed alongside the core process claims often enough that reactor hardware is not a peripheral afterthought. Electrolytic production (C25B, 8.4%) and separation processes (B01D, 6.0%) appear as smaller adjacent clusters, since a record can carry more than one class these shares sum above 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 335 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about syngas fermentation gas-liquid transfer and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaDisclosed are materials and methods for managing aerobic biosynthesis. The materials include a fermenter system comprising a fermenter, a microorganism provided to the fermenter, and at least two control loops. The methods are directed to measuring and controlling different oxygen concentrations within the fermenter.Filed by INV NYLON CHEMICALS AMERICAS, LLC and published 2025-06-24, this filing shows aerobic gas fermentation control loops for oxygen concentration entering the same claim space traditionally dominated by anaerobic syngas fermentation apparatus patents.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5593886A | Clostridium stain which produces acetic acid from waste gases | 743 |
| 2 | US6136577A | Biological production of ethanol from waste gases with Clostridium ljungdahlii | 655 |
| 3 | WO1998000558A1 | Biological production of acetic acid from waste gases | 576 |
| 4 | US5807722A | Biological production of acetic acid from waste gases with Clostridium ljungdahlii | 515 |
| 5 | US6340581B1 | Biological production of products from waste gases | 407 |
| 6 | US20080193989A1 | Energy Efficient Methods to Produce Products | 370 |
| 7 | WO2017165244A1 | Microorganisms and artificial ecosystems for the production of protein, food, and useful co-products from c1 … | 116 |
| 8 | US20200140901A1 | Process for using biogenic carbon dioxide derived from non-fossil organic material | 60 |
| 9 | US20150315599A1 | Methods and Systems for Methylotrophic Production of Organic Compounds | 59 |
| 10 | WO2015058011A1 | Improved carbon capture in fermentation | 51 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations inside a searched corpus — read them as a signal of foundational influence, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three patterns worth acting on before drafting claims or scoping a freedom-to-operate review in this space.
With 206 of 335 records concentrated among five assignees, most gas-liquid transfer apparatus and process-control approaches in commercial-scale syngas fermentation have already been claimed by a handful of players. New entrants should expect dense prior art on sparger geometry, bubble-column design and circulation loops from this group before assuming a clear path.
The drop from 14 records in 2021 to 4 in 2024 sits inside the window the dataset treats as complete, so it is not just a publication-lag artefact. It suggests the leading assignees have largely settled their core apparatus claims and are filing less around this specific mechanical problem than they were five years ago.
C12M apparatus classifications sit on close to half the record set, alongside C12N microorganism claims on 39.7%. A reactor design that only addresses strain performance without also covering gas transfer hardware is likely to run into someone else's apparatus claim.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to syngas fermentation gas-liquid transfer, with the prior art for and against each one.
Filing here is led by a small group with long-running syngas fermentation programmes, followed by a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants.
The leading assignee's 70 records dwarf the fifth-place count of 16, pointing to a long-running, well-resourced programme spanning strain, apparatus and process-control claims built up over more than a decade.
Tenth place holds only 8 records against a leader at 70, and the top 10 combined reach 77.6% of all 335 records — meaning the remaining 61 ranked assignees share less than a quarter of the field between them.
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest links connect a company to its own subsidiary or named inventors rather than to external partners — cross-company collaboration on gas-liquid transfer claims is rare.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| LanzaTech Inc | 0 | -100% |
| LanzaTech NZ Inc | 0 | — |
| Ineos Bio SA | 0 | — |
| LANZATECH NZ INC | 0 | — |
| Coskata Inc | 0 | — |
| Synata Bio Inc | 0 | — |
| Kiverdi Inc | 0 | — |
| IOGEN CORPORATION | 0 | — |
The dataset points to a field with settled core claims and a shrinking but still-active edge. Two directions make sense from here.
Given 61.5% concentration among five assignees, a new mechanical design for gas-liquid contact should be checked against their granted claims before committing to a reactor geometry.
Explore FTO workflows in EurekaThe representative 2025 filing on aerobic oxygen control loops suggests a newer sub-branch forming outside the traditional anaerobic apparatus claims — worth monitoring for further activity.
Set up monitoring in EurekaFiling in this specific gas-liquid transfer niche is led by one assignee with 70 of the 335 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 16. The top 5 of 71 ranked assignees together account for 61.5% of all records, so most core apparatus and process-control approaches — sparger design, bubble column geometry, circulation loops — have already been claimed by a small group. A new entrant should expect to design around this cluster's granted claims rather than file into open space.
Filings peaked in 2017 at 38 records and have declined since, with the 2021-to-2024 window — the most recent period the data treats as complete — showing a 71% drop from 14 records to 4. Counts for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so those years will rise before the full picture is known. Based on the complete years, though, disclosed filing activity on this specific mechanical problem has genuinely slowed rather than merely appearing to slow.
Mass transfer and gas holdup claims typically cover the physical mechanism by which gas dissolves into the fermentation broth — bubble size, sparger geometry, transfer coefficients — while bioreactor apparatus claims (C12M) cover the physical reactor hardware that produces those conditions. In this dataset, C12M apparatus classifications touch 48.4% of the 335 records, nearly as high as the 39.7% carrying microorganism and genetic engineering claims (C12N), showing that hardware and biology are claimed together at similar depth rather than one dominating the other.
US12338428B2, filed by INV NYLON CHEMICALS AMERICAS and published in mid-2025, claims a fermenter system with at least two control loops for measuring and managing different oxygen concentrations during aerobic biosynthesis. It sits in a smaller, newer cluster of aerobic gas fermentation control-loop claims rather than the larger anaerobic syngas fermentation apparatus base that dominates the rest of this landscape. Anyone building an aerobic gas fermentation process with multi-loop oxygen control should review this claim scope directly rather than assume it is covered by the older anaerobic apparatus prior art.
The technology composition data shows most records cluster around core C12P fermentation process claims (95.5%) and C12M bioreactor apparatus claims (48.4%), while adjacent classes like C25B electrolytic production (8.4%), B01D separation processes (6.0%) and C07C compound chemistry (4.5%) appear far less often within this same search scope. That pattern, combined with a limited number of co-assignee pairs (10) suggesting little cross-company collaboration, points to under-claimed territory in areas like real-time gas holdup sensing, micro-bubble sparger geometries and hollow-fibre membrane gas transfer designs — all mechanically adjacent to the dominant claims but not yet heavily filed.
Go past this page: query the whole syngas fermentation gas-liquid transfer 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.