https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/halide-solid-electrolyte-moisture-stability-doping-composition-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-10-26 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Batteries & Energy Storage

Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Patents

12 families and 16 published records on halide solid electrolyte moisture stability doping, with filings concentrated in China.

16
Published Records
12
Simple Patent Families
25%
In Force at Cut-off
CN
Leading Jurisdiction

16 published records collapse into 12 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. In force = 4 of 16 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.

  • 12 simple patent families and 16 published records make up this dataset, searched without any date limit.
  • China FAW Co Ltd is named on 2 of the 12 families (16.7%), the largest single-row share in the listed filers.
  • China received 12 of the 16 published records filed across the 5 receiving offices returned by the search.
Check your own idea
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this dataset covers

This page tracks records matching a search for halide solid electrolyte or halide electrolyte terms combined with moisture or humidity and stability or stabilization language. The search carries no date limit, so every matching record in the database is in scope regardless of when it was filed. The result is 16 published records that de-duplicate down to 12 simple patent families.

12 families is a small pool. The figures below describe what this particular search returned, not a map of the halide electrolyte field as a whole, a reader should treat this as a starting point for further search, not a finished landscape.

Records vs. families in scope
  1. CHINA FAW CO LTD2
  2. TIANJIN B&M SCI & TECH LTD1
  3. UNIV OF SCI & TECH BEIJING1
  4. Shanghai Bozhi Automotive Design Co., Ltd.1
  5. GUIZHOU MATERIAL IND TECH INSTITUE1
  6. Chenzhou Shangyi New Energy Co., Ltd.1
  7. JILIN UNIVERSITY1
  8. SHENZHEN BTR NEW ENERGY TECH RES INST CO LTD1
  9. Chenjiang Laboratory1
  10. HUAZHONG UNIV OF SCI & TECH1

Ordered by volume only, not by importance or claim strength. Counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families, so one invention filed in several countries counts once. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field as recorded on each document; subsidiaries and group companies are not merged. The icon before each name is read from the name itself (words such as University, Institute or Ltd); the data carries no organisation-type field, so treat it as a reading aid rather than a classification. 2 rows in this table start with the same name (Chenzhou Shangyi New Energy Co., Ltd., Chenzhou New Energy Battery Materials Research Center). They are left as separate rows, so the largest-filer figure above is per legal entity, not per group. Rows that look related still cannot be added together: one family can name several of them. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified; that identification is not exhaustive, so an individually held filing can still appear below. Either way those filings stay inside the totals above. This table shows the top 14 of the 14 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 14 is not the complete set of filers. A single family can name more than one filer, so these counts overlap and do not add up to the total.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from one Patsnap search for Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Numbers

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 12-family, 16-record dataset: how publications arrived over time, and which IPC subclasses the families carry.

Filing trend (published records, by earliest filing year)

Records run from 2022 (2 records) to a peak of 8 in 2025, with 4 recorded for 2026. The 2022-onward stretch is still filling in as later filings publish, so the most recent years understate their eventual count; this counts published records, not de-duplicated inventions, so a single invention filed in several countries adds more than one mark.

Filing trend (published records, by earliest filing year)02468220222023202482025420262022 onwards are shaded as still filling in: a filing is only visible once it publishes, up to 30 months after filing.

Counted in published records by earliest filing year, not de-duplicated into families. A filing is counted in the year it was filed, but it only becomes visible after it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. 2022 onwards are therefore still filling in and are shaded; no growth figure on this page uses them. Because this series counts documents rather than inventions, a rise can mean more inventions or the same inventions filed in more countries; this dataset cannot separate the two.

Technology composition (IPC subclass share of families)

H01M, covering batteries, cells and fuel cells, appears on all 12 of the 12 simple patent families in scope (100%). Other subclasses returned by the search sit at low single-digit family counts and are not broken out in prose.

Technology composition (IPC subclass share of families)H01M · Batteries, cells & fuel cells12100.0%C01B · Non-metallic elements & inorga…18.3%C01D · Alkali-metal compounds18.3%C01G · Compounds of other metals18.3%

Shares are the percentage of the 12 patent families in scope. One patent family can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from one Patsnap search for Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about halide solid electrolyte moisture stability doping composition patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Example Record

One record from the result set

From the result set
US20260094881A12026-04-02

Electrolyte coating, solid-state battery and electrical device

AESC JAPAN LTD.

Disclosed are an electrolyte coating, a solid-state battery and an electrical device. The electrolyte coating is coated on the surface of a solid-state electrolyte. The solid-state electrolyte includes one or both of a sulfide electrolyte and a halide electrolyte, wherein the electrolyte coating is a copolymer of tridecafluorooctyl methacrylate and n-butyl methacrylate. By coating the electrolyte coating on the surface of the sulfide electrolyte and the halide electrolyte, the present disclosure significantly increases the stability thereof in the air (even with high humidity) on the premise of not substantially affecting the conductivity thereof.This is the first record returned under the database's default ordering, not the most cited, newest or broadest filing in the set. It is shown to illustrate what one record in scope actually claims.

View full record

Selected as the first record the search returns under the database default order, then shown in full. It is not ranked by citations, claim breadth or commercial importance, and it is not a judgement about which filing in this space matters most.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. The first record the search returned, shown in full. Derived from one Patsnap search for Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis


  
Where to run it
Fastest

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 →
For builders

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 →
Key Figures

What the counts show

Four figures drawn directly from the search results, each counted in the unit the evidence summary attaches to it.

Scope
12 families / 16 records
simple patent families / published records

Two different counts, same search

The search returns 16 published records that de-duplicate to 12 simple patent families. No date limit was applied, so this reflects every matching record at retrieval, not a fixed filing window.

Retrieved 2026-10-26
Largest filer
16.7%
share of 12 families

China FAW Co Ltd, 2 of 12 families

China FAW Co Ltd is named on 2 of the 12 simple patent families in scope (16.7%), the largest single-row share among the listed filers. Filer rows are not rolled up to corporate group and cannot be added together, since one family can name more than one filer.

14 of 14 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each
Legal status
4 of 16
records in force at retrieval

25% in force at the cut-off

4 of the 16 published records (25%) were granted and still in force at the retrieval date. The remaining records are not broken out by status in this dataset, so no further split can be stated.

Status as of 2026-10-26
Receiving offices
14 of 14
records filed via China

Office filing counts across 5 offices

Of the 16 published records, 12 were filed via China, with the Europe (EPO), India, Japan and United States offices each carrying 1. These counts are by filing office, not by filer nationality, and sum to the record total because one invention can be filed at more than one office.

5 receiving offices returned in total
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to halide solid electrolyte moisture stability doping composition patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next

Where to take this from here

This page is a starting point built from one search string. Refining the search, pulling granted claims, or tracking how later filings publish are the natural next steps.

Read the granted claims directly

Family and IPC counts describe where documents sit, not what any claim set actually requires. For any record that matters to a design or a filing decision, pull the granted claims and prosecution history.

Open in Eureka →

Track how later years fill in

The 2022-onward stretch of the filing trend will keep gaining records as pending applications publish. Re-running the search later will show a fuller picture of those years.

Set up monitoring in Eureka →

Broaden or narrow the search string

A 12-family result is sensitive to the exact terms used. Adjusting the moisture/humidity and stability/stabilization terms may surface adjacent records this search did not catch.

Refine the search in Eureka →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Suggested next steps. No new data: every figure named here is one of those above. Derived from one Patsnap search for Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions on this dataset

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from one Patsnap search for Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape, covering all matching records regardless of filing date (the search string sets no date limit), retrieved 2026-10-26. Counts cover published records only and move as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Halide Solid Electrolyte Moisture Stability Doping Composition Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole halide solid electrolyte moisture stability doping composition patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka
How this page was built, and what the numbers do and do not mean

Search. Every figure on this page comes from one Patsnap search, run once and not edited afterwards. This is the exact search string:

TAC:(("halide solid electrolyte" OR "halide electrolyte") AND (moisture OR humidity) AND (stability OR stabilization))

Reading the field codes: TAC searches the title, abstract and claims of each record, not the full description. The search string sets no date limit, so the scope is every matching record in the database regardless of when it was filed. It is not restricted to recent years. How this string was built matters for how far the counts can be pushed. It was generated in batch from a topic list rather than hand-crafted for this page, and the result set is not manually screened. A keyword search over title, abstract and claims both over-captures (unrelated filings that happen to use the same words) and under-captures (the same invention written in different words). This page cannot measure either effect, so read every figure here as what this particular string returned, not as what exists in the field. One subclass (H01M) carries 100.0% of the patent families, so this search returned a classification-tight set.

What is being counted. Two different units appear on this page and they are not interchangeable. The filer list and the technology split are counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families: one invention counts once however many countries it was filed in. The total, the jurisdiction split and the filing-year chart are counted in published records: the same invention counts once per publication. For this search that is 16 records and 12 families. Record counts reward filing in many jurisdictions; family counts do not. Shares are only ever taken against a denominator in the same unit, and each one names it.

Who the filers are. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field, as recorded on the documents themselves. They are not rolled up to corporate group: a parent and its subsidiaries appear as separate entries, and a portfolio acquired from another company stays under the name on the document unless the assignment is reflected there. This list is meant to carry organisations, not people. Filings held by a named individual are identified by matching the assignee against the inventors on the same search, and, for names written in Chinese, Japanese or Korean characters, by the name carrying no organisational suffix; those are removed from the list. Neither test is exhaustive: the inventor list it matches against is itself capped, and a personal name written in Latin script with no organisational wording in it cannot be told apart from a short company name by rule. So an individually held filing can still appear in the list. Those filings stay inside every total and share on this page either way, so the listed entries can add up to less than the total. A record shown in full further down still names its assignee exactly as the patent office records it, including where that is a person: that name is how the record is identified and checked. What is left out of the ranking is people as ranked entries, not people as cited sources. The table shows the top 14 of the 14 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 14 is not every filer. One patent family can name several filers and each is counted separately, so these rows are not slices of a divided whole: adding them together over-counts, and this page deliberately publishes no combined "top five" share for that reason. See every filer, individuals included

Dates. The year chart counts by earliest filing year, not publication year. A filing only becomes visible once it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. Measured across these pages, the year four back from today still holds only about 89% of its eventual count. 2022 onwards are therefore shaded on the chart as still filling in. The data behind this page was retrieved on 2026-10-26.

Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (4 of 16). Everything else is pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or not determinable, and those states are not broken out here because the underlying codes do not separate them cleanly. Legal status changes continuously and is reported per document, not per family. Get the status breakdown in Eureka

Classification. The technology split uses IPC subclasses (four characters, for example H01M). A single record usually carries several, so the shares add up to more than 100% and a record can appear in more than one bar. Subclass is a coarse grouping; it describes the field a record was classified into, not what the claims cover. Break the classes down to subgroup level

Who wrote the words. The tables, charts, counts, shares and patent numbers on this page are produced directly from the search result by a program; none of them are written or estimated by a language model. The surrounding prose, headings, FAQ answers and the answers in the question panel are drafted by a language model that is given those same figures and is not permitted to introduce others. Prose can still mis-describe a correct figure, so where the two disagree, the tables and charts are the record.

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 limitations that apply to every figure above. Recent filings are under-counted, because an application is not public until roughly 18 months after filing and database loading adds further delay. The search string defines and constrains everything shown: records that use different terminology, or that sit outside the fields searched, are absent and cannot be counted. Applicant names, classification codes, legal-status codes and citation records are taken as recorded and may contain errors, duplicates, omissions or stale entries. Ordering by volume is not a measure of quality, scope, enforceability or commercial value, and a larger portfolio is not a stronger one. 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, validity or infringement search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. No attorney-client relationship is created by it. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently against the primary records 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.

The question panel. The answers behind the suggested questions on this page were written when the page was generated, not in response to your click. The progress steps that play before an answer appears are an animation of how that analysis was done; nothing is being searched or computed at that moment. Typing your own question instead opens Patsnap Eureka, which does run it live.

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.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.