Understanding the contribution of Canadian companies to the patenting activity community is important. The following section takes a more in-depth look at the Canadian applicants. Table 2 below provides a summary of the Canadian corporate applicants within the shale oil and gas subset.
Similar to Figure 1, Figure 12 depicts an upward trend in patent filings. The high degree of variation from year to year is due to the low level of filings. However, filings are trending upwards overall.
| Number of Canadian patent families | 100 |
|---|---|
| Priority year range | 2000 to 2012 |
| Applicants | 171 |
| Priority countries | 8 |
| Priority year | Patent family filings |
|---|---|
| 2000 | 2 |
| 2001 | 1 |
| 2002 | 6 |
| 2003 | 4 |
| 2004 | 1 |
| 2005 | 9 |
| 2006 | 9 |
| 2007 | 12 |
| 2008 | 4 |
| 2009 | 5 |
| 2010 | 16 |
| 2011 | 7 |
| 2012 | 15 |
Figure 13 shows the top Canadian applicants within the shale oil and gas industry sub-sector. The top spot is occupied by the Trican Well Service Limited, with seven patent families. Other major players with five or more patent families include Envirollea Incorporated (6), GASFRAC Energy Services Incorporated (6), and Flo-Dynamics Systems Incorporated (5). Note that these four companies are headquartered in Calgary, Alberta.
Figure 13: Top Canadian applicants
Description of Figure 13
| Assignee/Applicant | Number of records | Portfolio size (Number of documents) |
|---|---|---|
| Trican Well Service Ltd (Canada) | 7 | 6–20 |
| Envirollea Inc (Canada) | 6 | 6–20 |
| GASFRAC Energy Services Inc. (Canada) | 6 | 6–20 |
| Flo-Dynamics Systems Inc. (Canada) | 5 | 6–20 |
| Imperial Oil Resources Ltd (Canada) | 4 | 2–5 |
| Terralog Technologies Inc. (Canada) | 4 | 2–5 |
| Ivanhoe Energy Inc (Canada) | 3 | 2–5 |
| Nexen Inc. (Canada) | 3 | 2–5 |
| Osum Oil Sands Corp (Canada) | 3 | 2–5 |
| Pressol Ltd (Canada) | 3 | 2–5 |
Figure 13 shows a bar chart for the top Canadian applicants within the shale oil and gas industry sub-sector.
Figure 14 depicts the filing activities of the top Canadian applicants between 2000 and 2012. Patenting activity among the top five Canadian applicants begins in 2005. Overall, the patenting activity is sporadic.
Figure 14: Top Canadian applicant activity between 2000 and 2012
Description of Figure 14
| Applicants | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trican Well Service Ltd (Canada) | 3 | 2 | 2 | |||||||||||
| Envirollea Inc (Canada) | 3 | 1 | 2 | |||||||||||
| GASFRAC Energy Services Inc. (Canada) | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| Flo-Dynamics Systems Inc. (Canada) | 2 | 3 | ||||||||||||
| Imperial Oil Resources Ltd (Canada) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| Terralog Technologies Inc. (Canada) | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| Ivanhoe Energy Inc (Canada) | 3 | |||||||||||||
| Nexen Inc (Canada) | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| Osum Oil Sands Corp (Canada) | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| Pressol Ltd (Canada) | 3 |
Figure 14 is a timeline for the filings of top Canadian applicants. Each year with a filing is represented by a blue square that links the applicant to the year.
Figure 15 shows the priority country split for the top Canadian applicants. As expected, the top applicants in the Canadian subset mostly claim priority in the USA, with about 55% of all priority filings going there first. Flo-Dynamics Systems Inc. and Imperial Oil Resources Limited file all of their patents in Canada first. Approximately 35% of all Canadian filings have a Canadian priority.
Figure 15: Priority country shares for top Canadian applicants
Description of Figure 15
| Applicant | United States | Canada | World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) | Australia |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trican Well Service Ltd (Canada) | 85% | 15% | ||
| Envirollea Inc (Canada) | 66.60% | 33.30% | ||
| GASFRAC Energy Services Inc. (Canada) | 50% | 33% | 16.60% | |
| Flo-Dynamics Systems Inc. (Canada) | 100% | |||
| Imperial Oil Resources Ltd (Canada) | 100% | |||
| Terralog Technologies Inc. (Canada) | 100% | |||
| Ivanhoe Energy Inc. (Canada) | 100% | |||
| Nexen Inc (Canada) | 100% | |||
| Osum Oil Sands Corp (Canada) | 100% | |||
| Pressol Ltd (Canada) | 100% |
Figure 15 shows the priority country shares for the top Canadian applicants. The image shows bars with different colors representing the percentage shares for top Canadian applicants. Dark red represents the United States, orange represents Australia, sky blue represents Canada and purple represents the World.
Table 3 indicates the total number of patent families by priority year for the top inventors associated with the leading Canadian patent applicants.
| Inventor Name | Number of Patent Families |
|---|---|
| WHEELER Lucie B. (Canada) | 6 |
| ZHANG KEWEI (Canada) | 6 |
| ELLIOTT David J. (Canada) | 5 |
| BILAK ROMAN (Canada) | 4 |
| BRUNO MICHAEL S. (European Union) | 4 |
| DUSSEAULT Maurice B. (Canada) | 4 |
| MESHER Shaun T. (Canada) | 4 |
| KALOTA Steven A. (European Union) | 3 |
| LIVINGSTONE James I. (Canada) | 3 |
| LOREE Dwight N. (Canada) | 3 |
| MONKMAN Jack (Canada) | 3 |
| PAGE Pat (Canada) | 3 |
| PAVEL STEPHEN K. (European Union) | 3 |
| SILVERMAN Michael A. (European Union) | 3 |
| ADEYINKA Olusola B. (Canada) | 2 |