Viral Clearance & Virus Filtration Patents: Who Leads 2026
- One assignee holds the entire ranking. all 14 records in scope trace to a single company, which is unusual concentration for a purification sub-field.
- Filing peaked in 2021 at 11 records, then fell to zero by 2024. the -100% swing from 2021 to 2024 is a real drop, not a publication-lag artefact, since 2024 is the last complete year.
- B01D and C07K classes cover nearly every record. separation processes and peptide/protein claims appear together in almost all 14 records, showing how tightly filtration method and biologic product are bound in the claims.
Filing growth compares 2021 (11 records) with 2024 (0) — 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.
A small, tightly held patent set
Viral clearance and virus filtration patents cover the methods used to remove or inactivate viral particles during biologic drug purification, spanning low pH inactivation, virus retentive filtration (VRF) and the process-closure steps that connect them in continuous manufacturing. The scope here is defined by claims that explicitly reference filter throughput, log reduction value or spiking-study validation, which keeps the record count small and the subject matter specific rather than a broad sweep of purification patents generally.
With only 14 records in scope and one assignee accounting for all of them, this is not a competitive landscape in the usual sense. It reads instead as a record of how a single filer has built out claim coverage around continuous virus retentive filtration, with filing activity concentrated in a short window rather than spread evenly across the coverage period.
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
The trend line and IPC breakdown below are drawn directly from the 14 records in scope; no figures here are estimated.
Filing rose sharply to a 2021 peak, then stopped
Filings were flat at zero through the early coverage years, rose to a peak of 11 in 2021, then fell to zero by 2024 — a -100% change over that three-year span. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in and should not be read as confirmation that activity has ended.
Filtration and biologic-product classes dominate together
B01D (separation processes) appears in all 14 records and C07K (peptides & proteins) in 13 of 14, meaning nearly every filing pairs a filtration method claim with a protein-product claim. A61L (sterilising/disinfecting) and A61K (medicinal preparations) each cover more than three-quarters of records, while A47J and A61P each appear in a single record — a sign of narrow, incidental claim scope rather than an emerging branch.
Shares are the percentage of the 14 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Viral Clearance and Virus Filtration with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about viral clearance and virus filtration and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe record anchoring this field
US20220106358A1 — Continuous virus retentive filtration
The application describes methods and systems for viral clearance in antibody purification, using a hydrophobic interaction chromatography (HIC) column connected inline with a virus retentive filtration (VRF) system in a continuous processing line. The VRF system runs at least two filter trains in parallel, addressing throughput and process-closure requirements together rather than as separate steps.Filed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; published 2022-04-07.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20220106358A1 | Continuous virus retentive filtration | 1 |
| 2 | WO2022072899A1 | Continuous virus retentive filtration | 1 |
Both of the most-cited records describe the same continuous virus retentive filtration system under related US and WO filings; citation counts here are low in absolute terms, consistent with a small, recent record set.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (2 of 2 rows); 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 stand out once the record set is this concentrated: who holds it, when it was built, and where the claim boundaries actually sit.
A single filer owns the entire ranking
Every one of the 14 records in scope, and the full assignee ranking, traces to one company. That is not typical market concentration — it reflects how narrowly this search scope is drawn around a specific technical combination that one filer has claimed comprehensively.
Activity clustered in a short window
Filing was at zero in the early coverage years, rose to 11 in the peak year of 2021, then dropped to zero by 2024. That -100% change over three years describes a real filing pause on the last complete year of data, not a slowdown still being measured.
Filtration claims are bound to protein-product claims
Nearly every record pairs a separation-process claim (B01D) with a peptide/protein claim (C07K), and most also carry a sterilising/disinfecting class (A61L). That layering makes individual claims harder to design around, since a competing filing has to clear the filtration method and the product-specific limitation together.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to viral clearance and virus filtration, with the prior art for and against each one.
One incumbent, several open branches
With the ranking held entirely by one company, the more useful question for a new entrant is not who else is filing but where the incumbent's claims stop.
The sole ranked assignee
The one company in the assignee ranking accounts for all 14 records in scope, including both of the most-cited filings on continuous virus retentive filtration. Its momentum in the latest tracked year is zero, consistent with the broader filing pause seen after 2021.
Filings spread thin across jurisdictions
Receiving offices include Israel (2), Australia, Canada, the Eurasian Patent Organization, the EPO and Hong Kong, each with only one or two filings. No single office dominates, which suggests the international filing strategy here is exploratory rather than a deliberately built jurisdictional moat.
Two classes barely touched
A47J (kitchen and cooking utensils) and A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) each appear in only one of the 14 records, most likely as incidental classifications rather than deliberate claim territory. Neither has been built out, leaving room for a filer to stake a clearer position if a genuine technical link exists.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The record set here is small enough that a single search string change can materially shift the picture; broadening or narrowing scope is worth testing before drawing firm conclusions.
Check adjacent purification steps
This scope excludes chromatography and ultrafiltration claims that do not explicitly mention viral clearance terms. Broadening the search to related downstream processing steps may surface additional context for the same incumbent's portfolio.
Explore related purification patents in EurekaTrack the post-2021 filing gap
The drop to zero filings by 2024 is worth monitoring as 2025-2026 publications continue to arrive, since publication lag means the current picture is still incomplete for those years.
Set up trend monitoring in EurekaTest a claim in the open branches
The under-claimed classes and gate chips above point to specific technical combinations that have not been built out. Drafting a first claim against one of these is a faster path to freedom-to-operate clarity than searching the incumbent's core filings again.
Draft and search a claim in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
In this dataset, one company accounts for all 14 records in scope and the entire assignee ranking, including both of the most-cited filings on continuous virus retentive filtration. That degree of concentration is unusual and reflects how narrowly the search scope is defined around specific technical terms like log reduction value and spiking study, rather than a broad view of viral clearance patenting generally. A wider search string covering more general purification claims would likely surface additional filers.
Filing rose from zero in the early coverage years to a peak of 11 in 2021, then fell to zero by 2024, a -100% change over that three-year span. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as continued decline. The complete picture through 2024 shows a genuine pause after the 2021 peak, not merely a slowdown still being measured.
The filing describes a continuous processing system that connects a hydrophobic interaction chromatography (HIC) column inline with a virus retentive filtration (VRF) system built from at least two parallel filter trains. It targets viral clearance during antibody purification, addressing throughput and process-closure requirements as a combined step rather than as separate unit operations. Anyone designing a continuous purification line with inline VRF should review this claim scope carefully before finalising a similar architecture.
B01D, covering separation processes such as filtration, appears in all 14 records in scope, and C07K, covering peptides and proteins, appears in 13 of the 14. A61L (sterilising and disinfecting) and A61K (medicinal preparations) each cover more than three-quarters of records, showing that filtration method claims are almost always paired with biologic product claims. A47J and A61P each appear in only one record, suggesting incidental rather than deliberate claim territory in those areas.
The clearest openings sit in areas adjacent to the incumbent's core claims: multi-train parallel throughput scaling, inline process-closure validation between chromatography and filtration steps, spiking study protocols specific to continuous systems, and prefilter selection for high-titre feed streams. None of these show sustained claim density in the current 14-record set. A first filer with a specific technical claim in one of these areas would not be competing directly against the dominant assignee's existing coverage.
Research Viral Clearance and Virus Filtration in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole viral clearance and virus filtration 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.