Unit Dose Detergent Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- One assignee dominates the ranking. the leader holds 92 of the 118 records in scope, against a fifth-place count of just 5 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual tail.
- Filing peaked in 2021 at 46 records and had fallen to 1 by 2024, the last year in the trend that can be treated as complete; 2025-26 figures are still filling in under publication lag.
- Packaging claims outnumber chemistry claims B65D (containers & packaging) appears on 69.5% of the 118 records, versus 39.0% for C11D (detergent compositions) — the pouch and compartment mechanics are more heavily claimed than the liquid formulation itself.
Filing growth compares 2021 (46 records) with 2024 (1) — 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.
What this patent set covers
This landscape covers unit dose detergent pouches and the chemistry and packaging used to keep their liquid contents stable — water-soluble films, enzyme stabilizers, phase-separation control, borate replacement, compartment sealing and cold-dissolution behaviour. The scope spans 118 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from a search string that pairs the product form (unit dose pouch, liquid detergent stabilization) with the specific technical mechanisms used to solve its two hardest problems: keeping enzymes active in a liquid matrix, and keeping compartments sealed until the wash.
The dataset sits across two adjacent disciplines — packaging engineering and detergent chemistry — which is visible in the IPC composition: container and packaging classes outnumber pure detergent-composition classes by a wide margin. That split matters for freedom-to-operate work, because a formulation that avoids every enzyme-stabilizer claim can still be blocked by a compartment-sealing or film-lamination claim, and vice versa.
Filing trend and technology composition
The data below is drawn from the same 118-record set described above: an annual filing count and the IPC subclasses that recur across those records.
Filing activity, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 12 in 2017 to a peak of 46 in 2021, then fell to 1 by 2024 — a decline of 98% across that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, so the apparent drop after 2024 should not be read as the field going quiet; it is a measurement artefact until later data cuts fill in.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
B65D (containers and packaging) appears on 82 of the 118 records (69.5%) and C11D (detergents and cleaning compositions) on 46 (39.0%) — together the two classes account for most of the claim activity. Smaller counts in B01J, C08F, C08L, C09D, C08J and C08K point to narrower chemistry-side work on polymer film composition, coatings and additive use; each individually covers under 10% of records, and several overlap on the same document.
Shares are the percentage of the 118 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Unit Dose Detergents and Liquid Stabilization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about unit dose detergents and liquid stabilization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this set
Flexible box bag comprising soluble unit dose detergent pouch
A detergent product including a flexible box bag and soluble unit dose detergent pouch.Filed by The Procter & Gamble Company, published 2017-04-06 as US20170096275A1. It illustrates the packaging-side claim style that recurs across this dataset: a container structure built specifically around a soluble unit-dose pouch, rather than a claim on the detergent liquid itself.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EP2166092A1 | Detergent composition | 58 |
| 2 | US20220289436A1 | Detergent product container with lock and transversal wall | 34 |
| 3 | US20230264852A1 | Cover with tactile discontinuity | 32 |
| 4 | US20230132541A1 | Cover with first and second actuation areas | 26 |
| 5 | US20230286695A1 | Cover, lock and alignment mark | 24 |
| 6 | US20220185534A1 | Detergent product container with lock and top panel | 19 |
| 7 | WO2022157311A1 | Liquid enzyme composition with sulfite scavenger | 17 |
| 8 | US20230331447A1 | Detergent product container with lock | 13 |
| 9 | US20220380086A1 | Detergent product container with lock | 13 |
| 10 | WO2023104646A1 | Package containing water-soluble capsules | 10 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings, which have had more time to accumulate citations — read this as a signal of influence on later filers, not of current commercial importance.
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 mean for a filing decision
Three patterns in this dataset are relevant to anyone deciding where to file next or where to check for blocking art.
One assignee, then a steep drop
The leading assignee holds 92 of the 118 records in the ranking; the fifth-ranked company holds just 5. That is not a gradual long tail — it is a single dominant filer followed by a small group of much smaller players, which changes how a freedom-to-operate search should be prioritised.
Peak filing was 2021, not now
Annual filings fell from a peak of 46 in 2021 to 1 in 2024, a decline the evidence states as -98% over that span. Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025-26 counts are not yet reliable evidence of a slowdown — treat 2024 as the last complete year.
Packaging claims outweigh chemistry claims
B65D (containers and packaging) covers 69.5% of the 118 records, ahead of C11D (detergent compositions) at 39.0%. A formulation-only clearance search that skips packaging classes will miss most of the claim density in this field.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to unit dose detergents and liquid stabilization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is active, and where the collaboration sits
The ranking returned by this dataset covers 9 companies. Recent-year momentum has cooled across the board, consistent with the post-2021 filing decline; the leading assignee is the only one shown with any activity in the latest year.
Procter & Gamble
Holds the large majority of ranked records in this set and is the only assignee shown with a filing in the latest year (1 record), suggesting continued if reduced activity while others have gone quiet.
Monosol and Givaudan
The strongest co-assignee link in the dataset, with 11 shared families — consistent with a film-supplier and ingredient/fragrance-house pairing on pouch formulation rather than a single-company effort.
Unilever's two IP-holding entities
Two Unilever-affiliated IP entities co-appear on 5 shared families, and a separate Dow/Rohm and Haas pairing also shares 5 — both patterns consistent with internal group filing structures rather than external collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Procter & Gamble Company | 1 | — |
| Monosol, LLC | 0 | — |
| Givaudan SA | 0 | — |
| Unilever Global IP Limited | 0 | — |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | 0 | — |
| Unilever IP Holdings B.V. | 0 | — |
| Rohm and Haas Company (USA) | 0 | — |
| Novozymes A/S | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The figures above describe the shape of the field; the next steps depend on whether the goal is clearance, licensing or R&D direction.
Check packaging claims, not just formulation
Because B65D packaging classes cover more of this dataset than detergent-composition classes, a clearance search limited to C11D formulation claims will miss most of the relevant art. Compartment sealing and film-container structures need their own review.
Explore packaging claims in Eureka →Watch the leader's residual filings
With most other assignees showing no activity in the latest year, Procter & Gamble's continued filing is the clearest signal of where the field is still moving. Tracking its newest publications is more informative than tracking the aggregate trend.
Track assignee activity in Eureka →Test the under-claimed branches
Borate-replacement chemistry, cold-dissolution film formulation and phase-separation barriers all sit in the smaller IPC subclasses. These are candidates for a first-claim search before committing R&D spend.
Run a white-space search in Eureka →Common questions on this landscape
In this dataset of 118 records, one assignee — Procter & Gamble — holds 92 of the ranked records, far ahead of the fifth-ranked company at 5. The gap is steep rather than gradual, meaning a freedom-to-operate check in this space should prioritise that single assignee's portfolio before looking at the smaller filers. The ranking itself covers 9 companies total, so it is a short list rather than a broad field of comparable-sized players.
Filing peaked in 2021 at 46 records and had dropped to 1 by 2024, a -98% change over that span according to the underlying data. However, publication typically lags actual filing by about 18 months, so the low counts for 2025 and 2026 in this dataset are provisional and will rise as more records publish. 2024 is the most recent year that can be treated as a complete count.
Packaging claims, classified under B65D, cover the physical pouch, compartment and container structures and appear on 69.5% of the 118 records in this set. Chemistry claims, classified under C11D, cover the detergent composition itself — enzyme stabilizers, surfactant systems and related formulations — and appear on 39.0% of records. Because these are separate claim domains that can each independently block a product, a formulation that clears one does not automatically clear the other.
Borate replacement refers to enzyme-stabilizer chemistry designed to protect active enzymes in a liquid detergent without using borate compounds, which face increasing regulatory restriction in several markets. In this dataset, the chemistry-side IPC subclasses most closely tied to that work — such as B01J and C08L — cover a smaller share of the 118 records than the packaging classes do, suggesting comparatively less dense claim coverage. That makes it a reasonable area to check for open claim space before assuming the ground is occupied.
Not directly. The most-cited records in this dataset, including EP2166092A1 and several Procter & Gamble container-lock filings, accumulated their citation counts over years, which structurally favours older documents over newer ones. A high citation count shows a record has influenced later filers within the searched corpus, but it is not a reliable measure of which technology is currently most commercially relevant — for that, filing recency and assignee momentum are better signals.
Research Unit Dose Detergents and Liquid Stabilization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole unit dose detergents and liquid stabilization 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.