Tool Battery Packs Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One filer accounts for 558 of 676 records. the leader alone holds roughly four-fifths of the entire dataset, a concentration rarely seen even among consolidated hardware categories.
- The top 5 assignees cover 95.3% of all 676 records. and the top 10 reach 99.4% — this field has almost no long tail of independent filers left to track.
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 87 records, then eased. 2021's 49 fell to 41 by 2024, a 16% pull-back over that span, even as publication lag means 2025-26 figures are still filling in.
Filing growth compares 2021 (49 records) with 2024 (41) — 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 676 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 676 published patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine tool battery pack or platform hardware with a specific functional claim: cell selection, pack impedance monitoring, fuel gauging, charge-time estimation, drop robustness or cross-compatibility between tools and packs. It is a narrow, function-defined slice of power-tool electrification rather than every battery patent touching a cordless tool.
The scope pulls in power-supply and grid-interface claims (H02J), combination and hand-tool mechanical claims (B25F, B25B, B23D, B25D), and the electrochemical and motor-control layers underneath them (H01M, H02P, H02K). Reading these classes together shows how tightly the pack, the tool body and the charging electronics are claimed as a single system rather than as separate inventions.
Filing trend and technology composition
Annual filings and IPC composition for the 676 records in scope, read together rather than as two separate charts.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran from 61 in 2017 to a peak of 87 in 2020, then eased to 49 in 2021 and 41 by 2024 — a 16% decline across that three-year window. 2025 and 2026 show fewer records only because publication typically trails filing by around 18 months; treat those last two bars as incomplete, not as evidence the field is winding down.
IPC subclass composition
H02J (power supply and grid systems) leads at 33.3% of the 676 records, ahead of B25F (combination and power hand tools) at 30.9% and H01M (batteries, cells and fuel cells) at 23.5%. Motor-control and mechanical-tool classes each sit in the 8-13% range. Because records carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum past 100% and should be read as overlap, not as a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 676 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Tool Battery Packs and Platforms with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about tool battery packs and platforms and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative claim architecture
Power tool battery pack with wireless communication
The pack combines a cell array, a voltage sensor and an onboard processor that converts sensed voltage to state of charge, reads the charger's charge rate, and derives a conversion factor to estimate time-to-full-charge — while also logging trigger-pull data over a wireless link. It is a fuel-gauge and usage-telemetry claim built directly into the pack rather than the tool or charger.Assignee: TTI (Macao Commercial Offshore) Limited · Published 2019-02-07
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5952815A | Equalizer system and method for series connected energy storing devices | 448 |
| 2 | US20140246416A1 | Electrically heated garment | 305 |
| 3 | US20080053716A1 | Refuelable battery-powered electric vehicle | 297 |
| 4 | US20060091858A1 | Method and system for battery protection | 290 |
| 5 | US7059769B1 | Apparatus for enabling multiple modes of operation among a plurality of devices | 252 |
| 6 | US20050007068A1 | Method and system for battery protection | 239 |
| 7 | US20110014501A1 | Fail safe serviceable high voltage battery pack | 216 |
| 8 | US20160311094A1 | Adapter for power tool devices | 205 |
| 9 | WO2015061370A1 | Adapter for power tool devices | 184 |
| 10 | US20070240892A1 | Cordless outdoor power tool system | 182 |
Citation counts accumulate over time, so older records such as the 1990s equalizer patent naturally lead this table — read it as a map of foundational influence, not of current filing priority.
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 concentration and trend actually mean
Three patterns stand out once the ranking and the IPC composition are read side by side.
This is a single-firm field, not a competitive one
The leading assignee alone holds 558 of 676 records, and the top five together cover 95.3% of everything in scope. A gap that large between first and fifth place means competitive-intelligence tracking here is really about one company's roadmap plus a handful of adjacent filers.
The leader's own filing pace has cooled sharply
The top assignee dropped from its recent run rate to just 3 records in the latest year, a 91% year-over-year fall, while most other ranked firms show zero latest-year activity. Given the ~18-month publication lag, this looks like a reporting gap as much as a real slowdown, but it is worth revisiting once 2025-26 data settles.
Power-supply claims outweigh pure battery-chemistry claims
H02J (power supply and grid systems) covers a third of records, ahead of H01M (battery cells) at 23.5%. That ordering says the contested ground is charging and power management around the pack, not the cell chemistry itself — consistent with the fuel-gauge and charge-time claims in the representative filing.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to tool battery packs and platforms, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claims, and where the gaps sit
The ranked list contains 47 companies total — read it as the full set the data endpoint returns, not a curated top-50.
One assignee dominates the entire dataset
The leading filer's 558 records dwarf the fifth-place holder's 8 and the tenth-place holder's 4. Any freedom-to-operate review in this space has to start with that one portfolio before looking anywhere else.
Past the top ten, filings thin out fast
The drop from 8 records at fifth place to 4 at tenth place shows how quickly the ranking flattens. Most of the 47 ranked companies hold only a handful of families each, making them worth watching for licensing or acquisition signals rather than as standalone blockers.
Co-filing is limited and concentrated in named inventors
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, with the strongest pairs built around individual named inventors rather than joint-venture-style corporate filings. This is a field of solo corporate filers more than shared development programmes.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp | 3 | -91% |
| Black & Decker Corp | 1 | — |
| TTI (Macao Commercial Offshore) Limited | 0 | — |
| SCOTT JOHN S | 0 | — |
| SCHEUCHER KARL F | 0 | — |
| Ingersoll Rand Co | 0 | — |
| NAUGHTON MICHAEL | 0 | — |
| ALBERTI DANIEL J | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a few concrete follow-ups depending on what the reader needs to decide.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 558 of 676 records, any new tool-battery filing should be checked against that portfolio's claim scope first, particularly in the fuel-gauge and charge-time-estimation area covered by the representative record.
Explore the leader's claims in EurekaProbe the under-claimed sub-areas before drafting
Drop-robustness sensing, cross-brand authentication and impedance-based balancing sit outside the densest IPC classes and may offer more room to file a defensible first claim.
Search white space in EurekaRevisit the 2025-26 trend once publication catches up
The apparent drop in the last two years is at least partly a publication-lag artefact; re-run the trend analysis in a year to see whether the 2021-2024 pull-back continued or reversed.
Track filing trends in EurekaCommon questions about tool battery pack patents
One assignee holds 558 of the 676 records in this dataset, an outsized share for any single company. The next four largest filers together bring the top-five total to 644 records, or 95.3% of everything in scope. Beyond that, the remaining 42 ranked companies split the last few percent, so most competitive activity worth tracking closely sits with a small handful of firms rather than a broad field of rivals.
In this dataset the dominant claim pattern combines a cell array and voltage sensor with a processor that derives state of charge and estimates charge time, often alongside wireless telemetry of usage data such as trigger-pull counts. IPC data backs this up: H02J (power supply and grid systems) covers 33.3% of the 676 records, ahead of pure battery-chemistry claims under H01M at 23.5%. The contested ground is the power-management and charging logic around the cells, not the cell chemistry itself.
Filings peaked in 2020 at 87 records, then eased to 49 in 2021 and 41 by 2024 — a 16% decline across that three-year window, which is a real signal since 2024 is the most recent year with largely complete data. The 2025-26 figures look lower still, but publication typically trails filing by around 18 months, so those final two years understate actual filing activity and should not be read as a further decline yet.
The densest classes are power supply management (H02J), combination hand tools (B25F) and battery cells (H01M), each covering a fifth to a third of the 676 records. Narrower functional areas such as drop-robustness sensor integration, cross-brand pack authentication and impedance-based cell balancing carry far fewer filings relative to those core classes, making them worth a closer freedom-to-operate look before assuming the space is crowded.
Very concentrated: the top five assignees cover 95.3% of all 676 records and the top ten reach 99.4%, leaving almost no long tail of independent filers. That is a higher concentration than most competitive hardware fields show, and it means tracking this space is largely a matter of monitoring one leading portfolio plus a small set of secondary filers rather than scanning a broad competitive set.
Research Tool Battery Packs and Platforms in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole tool battery packs and platforms 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.