Zeolite Catalyst Emission Control Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Filings peaked in 2017 at 268 and have declined every year since. the field is filling in existing claim space rather than expanding into new territory.
- B01J and B01D dominate at 3,028 and 2,929 records respectively. while F02B (internal-combustion engine integration) sits at just 18 — a narrow, largely unclaimed intersection.
- The most-cited prior art is a decade or more old. WO2008132452A2 and WO2008106519A1 still anchor freedom-to-operate analysis for transition-metal and copper CHA zeolite SCR catalysts.
Filing growth compares 2021 (127 records) with 2024 (52) — 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 3,382 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this dataset covers
This landscape tracks 3,382 patent families filed against IPC classes covering separation processes, catalytic chemistry and exhaust after-treatment — the technical core of zeolite-based NOx reduction and VOC abatement systems. Coverage runs from 2015 through mid-2026, with the 2026 figure necessarily partial because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
The picture that emerges is one of a mature, densely claimed field: filing volume rose to a clear peak in the late 2010s and has fallen back since, while the underlying chemistry — chabazite and other small-pore zeolite frameworks ion-exchanged with copper or iron — has stayed largely fixed as the reference point for new filings.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how records distribute across the IPC subclasses that define the technology.
A declining filing curve after a 2017 peak
Filings ran at 268 in 2017 and had fallen to a midpoint of 140 by 2022, continuing to trail off toward 2026. That shape is consistent with a technology whose core claim space — zeolite framework selection, metal-exchange method, SCR system integration — was staked out early and is now being incrementally defended rather than opened up.
Concentration in catalysis and separation classes
B01J (catalysis) and B01D (separation) each cover the large majority of records, with F01N (exhaust treatment hardware) a distant third at 1,498. The drop-off to C04B, C07C, C10G and especially F02B at 18 records marks where the chemistry has not yet been heavily claimed against specific engine or refining integration points.
Shares are the percentage of the 3,382 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Zeolite Catalyst Emission Control with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about zeolite catalyst emission control and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe prior art everyone designs around
Iron and copper-containing chabazite zeolite catalyst for NOx reduction
A chabazite (CHA) zeolite catalyst containing both iron and copper is provided as an SCR catalyst for reducing NOx from vehicle engine exhaust. Iron is incorporated during synthesis of the zeolite; copper is added afterward by ion exchange. The resulting catalyst is claimed to work across a wide temperature range, from roughly 200°C to 700°C.Filed by Ford Global Technologies, LLC — 2015-10-15.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2008132452A2 | Transition metal/zeolite SCR catalysts | 630 |
| 2 | WO2008106519A1 | Copper CHA zeolite catalysts | 411 |
| 3 | US5412946A | NOx decreasing apparatus for an internal combustion engine | 259 |
| 4 | DE4203807A1 | Catalytic nitrogen oxide(s) redn. appts. for vehicles – comprises flow mixer urea evaporator hydrolysis catal… | 248 |
| 5 | WO2012166868A1 | Cold start catalyst and its use in exhaust systems | 206 |
| 6 | US20080202107A1 | SCR on low thermal mass filter substrates | 200 |
| 7 | US5201802A | Exhaust gas purification system for an internal combustion engine | 181 |
| 8 | US20080241060A1 | Novel microporous crystalline material comprising a molecular sieve or zeolite having an 8-ring pore opening … | 160 |
| 9 | WO2000072965A1 | Zeolite catalysts for selective catalytic reduction of nitric oxide by ammonia and method of making | 142 |
| 10 | WO2016070090A1 | Mixed metal large crystal molecular sieve catalyst compositions, catalytic articles, systems and method | 140 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to be cited — read this as a map of influence, not a ranking of current 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 say
Four read-outs from the filing trend, IPC distribution and jurisdiction split that matter for anyone deciding where to file or where to look for freedom to operate.
Volume has been falling since 2017
The midpoint year, 2022, sits at 140 filings — roughly half the 2017 peak — and the decline continues toward the present. This is a signature of a technology consolidating around established solutions rather than one still being actively opened up.
Catalysis claims dominate the corpus
B01J and B01D together account for the overwhelming majority of filings, meaning most competitive activity sits in catalyst composition and separation-process claims rather than in hardware integration.
US and European filings lead, China and India close behind
United States and EPO filings lead the receiving-office count, with WIPO PCT, India, the UK and China all in a tighter secondary band — a sign that protection strategies are still built around US/EU markets first.
Co-filing is limited and mostly intra-group
The strongest co-assignee links connect entities that are effectively the same corporate group across jurisdictions, rather than independent companies partnering — collaboration in the open literature is thin.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to zeolite catalyst emission control, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space, and where it's thinning
Filing momentum has slowed across the named assignees in the most recent year, consistent with the overall downward filing trend rather than any single company pulling back.
Johnson Matthey Plc (UK) (Johnson Matthey)
Still filing in the most recent year but down sharply year over year, and one of the two strongest co-assignee links in the dataset, paired with its German catalyst subsidiary.
Umicore AG & Co. KG (Umicore)
Maintains a small but non-zero presence in the most recent filing year, placing it among the few assignees still active as overall volume declines.
BASF Corporation, Tosoh Corporation and others
Several previously prolific assignees, including BASF entities and Tosoh, show zero filings in the latest year — likely reflecting the general slowdown and publication lag rather than exit from the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Johnson Matthey Plc (UK) | 1 | -92% |
| Umicore AG & Co. KG | 1 | — |
| BASF Corporation | 0 | — |
| Tosoh Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| N.E. Chemcat Corporation | 0 | — |
| BASF SE | 0 | — |
| Ibiden Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Johnson Matthey Catalysts (Germany) GmbH | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to where claim density is high and where it thins out — the next step is testing a specific formulation or integration idea against that map.
Check freedom to operate against the core citations
WO2008132452A2 and WO2008106519A1 remain the most-cited anchors for transition-metal and copper CHA zeolite SCR chemistry; any new copper- or iron-exchanged zeolite claim should be checked against both directly.
Explore in EurekaLook at the thin IPC intersections
F02B, C07C and C10G each show a fraction of the filings seen in B01J and B01D — engine-integration and refining-adjacent claims may still have room.
Run a white space searchWatch recency, not just totals
Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the apparent 2025–2026 drop-off should be treated as provisional rather than a confirmed pullback by any single assignee.
Track filing momentumCommon questions
Zeolite catalysts, particularly copper- or iron-exchanged chabazite (CHA) framework materials, are used in selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems to convert nitrogen oxides (NOx) in engine exhaust into nitrogen and water. They are also used in molecular-sieve form for volatile organic compound (VOC) abatement, exploiting the zeolite's pore structure to adsorb and catalytically break down pollutants. The dataset here covers both applications, spanning IPC classes for catalysis, separation and exhaust after-treatment hardware.
The corpus shows filing activity concentrated among a small group of automotive-catalyst specialists and chemical majors, including Johnson Matthey-affiliated entities, Umicore, BASF and Tosoh, alongside co-filing links that mostly connect group subsidiaries across jurisdictions rather than independent partners. Recent-year momentum has slowed across nearly all of these assignees, in line with the broader decline in filing volume since the 2017 peak. This should be read as a snapshot of who has historically been most active, not a guarantee of future filing behaviour.
Filings rose to a peak of 268 in 2017 and have fallen in most years since, reaching a midpoint of 140 by 2022 and continuing lower toward 2026. This pattern typically indicates that the core claim space — zeolite framework choice, metal-exchange method, basic SCR system design — was staked out early, with more recent activity focused on incremental refinements. Part of the apparent decline in the most recent one to two years is also an artefact of publication lag, since filings typically take around 18 months to appear in the public record.
The clearest under-claimed intersections sit outside the dominant B01J and B01D classes: internal-combustion engine integration (F02B) has only 18 records against thousands in the core catalysis classes, and hydrocarbon refining (C10G), ceramic substrate composites (C04B) and acyclic hydrocarbon VOC pathways (C07C) are all similarly thin. These are areas where the underlying zeolite chemistry is well understood but its application to specific engine-control logic, refining processes or substrate materials has not been heavily claimed.
US20150290632A1, assigned to Ford Global Technologies, LLC, claims an iron-and-copper-containing chabazite zeolite SCR catalyst effective across a wide temperature range of roughly 200°C to 700°C. Any new filing that uses both iron (introduced during zeolite synthesis) and copper (added by ion exchange) on a CHA framework for NOx reduction needs to be checked against its specific claim language. It sits alongside older, more heavily cited prior art such as WO2008132452A2 and WO2008106519A1 as part of the baseline freedom-to-operate landscape for this chemistry.
Research Zeolite Catalyst Emission Control in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole zeolite catalyst emission control 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.