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 →https://eureka.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/spatial-barcoding-array-chip-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Genomics & BioinformaticsSpatial Barcoding Array Chip Patents: Who Leads and Where Filing Is Headed
A data-backed look at spatial barcoding array chip patents: filing trends since 2015, the leading assignees, technology composition by IPC class, and where white space remains for new entrants.
200
Published Records
55%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-54%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
EP
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth = 2021 (24 records) → 2024 (11); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 200 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What the spatial barcoding array chip patent record shows
Spatial barcoding array chips sit at the intersection of molecular biology and microfabrication: substrates, slides or chips carrying positionally encoded barcodes that let sequencing reads be mapped back to a physical location in a tissue section. The 200 records in scope span filings from 2015 through the current data cut-off, covering methods for building the barcoded substrate, the chemistry used to transfer barcodes into biological material, and the downstream analysis of spatially resolved sequencing data. Patent families, not raw document counts, are the fairer unit here because they neutralise aggressive continuation filing and multi-jurisdiction duplication by a single applicant.
Filing activity rose sharply through the back half of the 2010s, peaked in 2020, and has since pulled back — a pattern consistent with a technology that moved from foundational method claims toward consolidation among a smaller set of active filers. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent two years in the trend understate real filing activity and should not be read as a slowdown on their own.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 200-record dataset: filing activity by year, and the IPC subclasses that carry the claims.
Filing trend, 2014-2026
Filings rose from 2 records in 2014 to a peak of 42 in 2020, then declined to 11 by 2024 — a -54% drop from the 24 filings recorded in 2021. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence of continued decline.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C12Q (measuring/testing involving enzymes or DNA) appears in 80.0% of the 200 records, making it the dominant claim category, followed by C12N (genetic engineering, 33.0%) and G01N (material analysis, 23.0%). Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed.
Shares are the percentage of the 200 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about spatial barcoding array chip patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
A representative recent filing
Representative Record
Methods for spatial genomic, epigenomic and multi-omic profiling using transposases and light-activated spatial barcoding
CAMBRIDGE ENTERPRISE LIMITED
The present invention relates to a method of spatially barcoding one or more biological molecules located on or within a substrate by using a transposase complex to label the biological molecule of interest with a detection probe which may then give rise to a spatial barcode. Such analysis may include determining the spatial profiling of one or more biological molecules, specifically the spatial analysis of DNA, open chromatin, chromatin features, proteins and/or RNA which may be spatially barcoded by methods of the invention, either alone or in various combinations. The invention further relates to a transposase complex for use in spatially barcoding one or more biological molecules and reagents for carrying out the method.Abstract text as published; filing date and assignee are shown alongside the record.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for strategy
Four read-throughs from the concentration, trend and technology-composition data above.
Concentration
55.0% of 200 records
held by the top 5 assignees
The field is led by one dominant filer, not a cluster
A single leader holds 34 records against a fifth-place assignee at 14 — the gap between first and fifth is wide enough that a new entrant is more likely to compete for space below the top ten than to displace the leader outright.
Ranking covers 41 companies total
Filing momentum
-54% (2021→2024)
filings fell from 24 to 11
Peak filing has passed, but the picture is incomplete
Activity peaked at 42 records in 2020 and dropped through to 11 in 2024. Publication lag means 2025-2026 counts will keep rising as records surface, so this should be read as a real cooling from peak rather than a live trend line.
Peak year: 2020 at 42 records
Claim density
80.0% of records
carry a C12Q classification
Core assay claims are heavily occupied
Four in five records touch C12Q (enzyme/DNA measurement and testing), meaning most of the foundational assay-chemistry space already has prior art on file. New filings there face a denser search space than in adjacent apparatus classes.
C12N at 33.0%, G01N at 23.0%
Jurisdiction
55 EPO filings
vs. 40 in the United States
Europe and PCT routes lead US national filings
Europe (55) and WIPO/PCT (52) each carry more filings than the US national route (40), with Australia and Canada each at 12. Freedom-to-operate checks that stop at the US Patent and Trademark Office will miss the larger share of the documented activity.
AT: 7 filings
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 spatial barcoding array chip patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Derived observations on the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to three follow-up questions worth running before committing R&D or freedom-to-operate budget.
Map the white space under-claimed branches
B01L (lab apparatus, 7.5%) and A61B (diagnosis/surgery, 2.5%) are thin relative to the core C12Q claims. A targeted search of these subclasses against the leader's portfolio would show whether apparatus-level claims are genuinely open.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the leader's continuation strategy
With 34 records against a fifth-place count of 14, the top filer's prosecution pattern — continuations, divisionals, PCT-to-national conversions — determines how much of that lead is defensible claim scope versus filing volume.
Run a portfolio comparison in EurekaRe-check the 2025-2026 trend once lag clears
The apparent -54% drop from 2021 to 2024 is real, but 2025-2026 filings are still being published. Re-running the trend query in 12-18 months will show whether filing has stabilised or continued to soften.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about spatial barcoding array chip patents
The ranking covers 41 companies in total, and it is led by a single assignee with 34 of the 200 records in scope. The top 5 assignees together hold 55.0% of all records, and the top 10 hold 73.5%, which means the field has a clear leader followed by a long tail of smaller filers rather than an even spread across many companies. Universities and research institutes appear alongside commercial genomics companies in the ranked list, reflecting the technology's roots in academic method development before commercialisation.
Filing peaked in 2020 at 42 records and then declined, falling -54% from 24 filings in 2021 to 11 in 2024. That said, publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures in the dataset are still incomplete and will rise as more records surface. The honest read is that filing has cooled from its 2020 peak, not that it has stopped.
Measuring and testing methods involving enzymes and DNA (IPC class C12Q) appear in 80.0% of the 200 records, making it by far the most heavily claimed category. Genetic engineering methods (C12N, 33.0%) and material analysis techniques (G01N, 23.0%) follow. Because a single patent can carry multiple IPC classes, these percentages overlap rather than sum to 100%, and they indicate where claim density is highest — not where the technology is most mature.
The lower-share IPC classes — B01L lab apparatus (7.5%), C12M bioreactors and enzyme apparatus (3.0%), and A61B diagnosis and surgery (2.5%) — carry far fewer filings than the core C12Q assay chemistry. That does not guarantee those branches are free of prior art, but relative to the 80.0% density in C12Q, apparatus-level and diagnostic-integration claims are comparatively under-claimed and worth a targeted freedom-to-operate search before filing.
European (EPO) filings lead at 55, followed closely by WIPO/PCT filings at 52 and US national filings at 40, with Australia and Canada each at 12 and Austria at 7. Because the EPO and PCT routes each carry more filings than the US national route, a competitive or freedom-to-operate review limited to US patents would miss a substantial share of the documented activity in this space.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Spatial Barcoding Array Chip Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole spatial barcoding array chip patent landscape 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.