Binder Jetting Patent Landscape 2026
Binder Jetting Patent Landscape in 2026
Binder jetting IP is heavily concentrated among a small group of industrial and aerospace leaders, with General Electric Co holding the largest position by a significant margin. The field peaked in 2019 and annual volume has eased since, though the multi-year corpus remains substantial at 8,704 patent families.
General Electric leads a concentrated field; top five filers command one-third of the largest hundred applicants’ output
General Electric Co leads the binder jetting Desktop Metal Inc and Ricoh Co Ltd round out the top five at 304 and 273 patent families respectively.
The top five filers account for 34% of the combined output of the hundred largest filers, a level of concentration that signals a mature oligopoly at the top while leaving meaningful room for challengers in the second and third tiers. A visible gap separates the top five from the next cohort, which ranges from Nikon Corp at 241 down to Fraunhofer Gesellschaft at 58 patent families.
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | General Electric Co | 645 | |
| 2 | Stratasys Inc | 393 | |
| 3 | Align Technology Inc | 365 | |
| 4 | Desktop Metal Inc | 304 | |
| 5 | Ricoh Co Ltd | 273 | |
| 6 | Nikon Corporation | 241 | |
| 7 | Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | 152 | |
| 8 | Peridot Print LLC | 134 | |
| 9 | ArcelorMittal SA | 128 | |
| 10 | The Boeing Co | 118 |
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Evolve Additive Solutions Inc | 113 | |
| 12 | Evonik Operations GmbH | 108 | |
| 13 | Alcoa Inc | 100 | |
| 14 | Xerox Corporation | 99 | |
| 15 | Markforged Inc | 93 | |
| 16 | Applied Materials Inc | 83 | |
| 17 | Sandvik Machining Solutions AB | 64 | |
| 18 | GE Infrastructure Tech LLC | 64 | |
| 19 | RTX Corporation | 61 | |
| 20 | Fraunhofer Gesellschaft | 58 |
General Electric’s position — nearly 65% larger than the second-ranked Stratasys — reflects sustained investment across additive manufacturing processes, plastics shaping, and powder metallurgy. That breadth gives it structural advantages in cross-licensing and standard-setting that narrower challengers would need to account for.
The most recent 18–24 months of filing data are subject to publication lag and should be treated as incomplete; apparent softness in 2024–2026 data does not necessarily reflect a change in underlying R&D activity. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Annual volume peaked in 2019; additive manufacturing and plastics shaping dominate the technology mix
The filing trend chart shows how annual activity has evolved across the corpus, while the technology composition chart reveals which IPC branches define the current state of the art.
Annual filing trend
Filings grew from 958 in 2017 to a peak of 1,303 in 2019, then eased to the 1,059–1,145 range through 2022 before declining further. The 2023–2026 totals are materially affected by publication lag and should not be read as confirmed decline; the field’s multi-year window still reflects a large accumulated base.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
B33Y (additive manufacturing) and B29C (shaping of plastics) are the dominant branches, reflecting the process-level and material-level duality of binder jetting R&D. B22F (powder metallurgy) is the third-largest branch, signaling strong metal printing activity. Further branches — alloys, ceramics, welding, and dental/medical — show that the technology now spans multiple end-use verticals.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Composition for additive manufacturing by binder j…
Composition for additive manufacturing by binder jet printing, comprising a ceramic particulate material subjected to a heat treatment and a binder particulate material, wherein the heat treatment comprises heating a particulate ceramic material from 600 to 1200° C. for 1 to 20 h, to produce the ceramic particulate material subjected to a heat treatment and… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fabricating multi-part assemblies | 598 |
| 2 | Continuous liquid interface production system with… | 364 |
| 3 | Direct fabrication of orthodontic appliances with … | 355 |
| 4 | Method of using a powered stapling device | 337 |
| 5 | Dental appliance having ornamental design | 210 |
| 6 | Method of reinforced cementitious constrauction by… | 190 |
| 7 | 3d-printed packaging with blockchain integration | 166 |
| 8 | Feedstock for 3D printing and uses thereof | 160 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the competitive structure means for R&D positioning
Four structural dimensions — maturity, concentration, collaboration, and geography — define the strategic context for any new entrant or existing player deciding where to invest.
Post-peak field with a large installed knowledge base
The lifecycle evidence places binder jetting in a decline stage, with annual filings easing back from the 2019 peak. The multi-year corpus of 8,704 patent families indicates that foundational IP is densely filed; new entrants face a high prior-art burden in core process claims. Differentiation through application-specific or materials-specific claims is more tractable than broad process claims at this stage.
Lifecycle: Post-peakOligopoly at the top, open competition in the mid-tier
The top five filers hold 34% of the hundred largest filers’ combined output, and the gap between General Electric Co (645 patent families) and the next tier is wide. Below rank five, the ranking disperses across aerospace, materials, dental, and printing companies, indicating that specialist positioning remains viable for mid-tier players. A challenger strategy built around a specific vertical — metals, ceramics, or dental — faces less direct conflict than a broad platform approach.
Concentration: High at topSelective university and industry co-filing anchors key application areas
Align Technology Inc and Cubico LLC (Peridot Print LLC entity) co-filed 6 patent families, as did Ricoh Co Ltd and the University of Washington. Stratasys Inc co-filed 5 families with DePuy Synthes Products (orthopedic implants) and 3 with the University of Michigan Board, indicating an academic bridge in advanced materials. Hewlett Packard Development Company LP co-filed 5 families with Atlantic Research Institute and 1 with Nanyang Technological University. General Electric Co co-filed with GE Germany Holdings, Cummins Inc, and Utibat LLC. These partnerships map the ecosystem’s knowledge-transfer channels and flag institutions that could serve as R&D partners.
Collaboration: TargetedUS-dominant with meaningful European and PCT coverage
The United States is the primary filing jurisdiction by a large margin, followed by Europe (EPO) and WIPO (PCT). Germany ranks fourth, reflecting the presence of Fraunhofer Gesellschaft, Evonik Operations GmbH, and major industrial groups. China and Japan are present but relatively underweighted given their manufacturing scale, suggesting potential under-protection or under-prosecution risk in those markets for IP holders.
Geography: US-centricGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| Align Technology Inc | Cubico LLC | 6 |
| Ricoh Co Ltd | University of Washington | 6 |
| Stratasys Inc | DePuy Synthes Products Inc | 5 |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | Atlantic Research Institute | 5 |
| Stratasys Inc | University of Michigan Board of Regents | 3 |
| General Electric Co | Utibat LLC | 2 |
| Alcoa Inc | Howmet Aerospace Inc | 2 |
| General Electric Co | GE Germany Holdings GmbH | 1 |
| General Electric Co | Cummins Inc | 1 |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | Nanyang Technological University | 1 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
General Electric Co and Align Technology Inc: contrasting trajectories in the top tier
The applicant ranking is anchored by industrial and aerospace players at the top, but momentum data reveal diverging recent trends — with some leaders contracting sharply while one dental-focused player is accelerating.
General Electric Co
General Electric Co leads with 645 patent families and a technology emphasis on additive manufacturing processes (B33Y10, B33Y30) and plastics shaping (B29C64) — the broadest portfolio footprint in the corpus. Recent momentum shows a sharp contraction of –68% versus the prior three-year period, indicating a significant pullback in new filings. GE Infrastructure Tech LLC (64 patent families) and GE Germany Holdings appear as separate related entities, suggesting portfolio management across legal structures.
families: 645Align Technology Inc
Align Technology Inc ranks third with 365 patent families and is the standout momentum story in the top tier, with recent filings up +84% versus the prior three-year period. Its technology focus is tightly concentrated in dentistry and oral hygiene (A61C7) and additive manufacturing output (B33Y80, B33Y10), distinguishing it sharply from the broader process-focused leaders. This vertical specialization and rising filing rate position Align as the most active accumulator of dental-application binder jetting IP at present.
families: 365| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Co | 99 | ▼ -68% |
| Stratasys Inc | 66 | ▼ -8% |
| Align Technology Inc | 178 | ▲ +84% |
| Desktop Metal Inc | 47 | ▼ -49% |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | 10 | ▼ -90% |
| Nikon Corporation | 86 | ▼ -14% |
| Ricoh Co Ltd | 34 | ▼ -58% |
| ArcelorMittal SA | 65 | ▲ +59% |
Under-served branches adjacent to the binder jetting core
Several IPC branches sit at the periphery of the dominant B33Y/B29C cluster with relatively low patent-record counts, indicating areas where the technology intersects established fields but has not yet been heavily prosecuted.
C04B · Ceramics, cement & refractories
With 505 patent records, ceramics and refractory materials represent a lower-share branch adjacent to the dominant additive manufacturing cluster. Binder jetting is technically well suited to ceramic powder beds, but IP density remains modest relative to metals and plastics. Players with materials chemistry expertise — particularly in sintering-aid formulations and post-print densification — have a plausible entry path through C04B claims that would not directly conflict with the densest areas of the corpus.
Search this in Eureka →B28B · Shaping clay & cement products
B28B covers shaping of clay and cementitious materials and appears at 631 patent records — a relatively sparse branch given the growing interest in binder jetting for construction and concrete applications. The technical rationale is strong: large-format binder jetting of cementitious feedstocks addresses build speed and geometric complexity limitations in construction 3D printing. Entry paths exist through formulation (binder chemistry for alkaline matrices) and process control claims, areas where the existing IP density is low.
Search this in Eureka →How the top applicants differ by technology route
Strength of each leader across the main technology routes.
| Player | B33Y 10 · Additive manufacturing (3D printing) | B29C 64 · Shaping of plastics | B33Y 80 · Additive manufacturing (3D printing) | B33Y 30 · Additive manufacturing (3D printing) | B33Y 70 · Additive manufacturing (3D printing) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General Electric Co | Strong · 448 | Strong · 409 | Strong · 241 | Strong · 370 | Emerging · 71 |
| Stratasys Inc | Strong · 241 | Strong · 266 | Emerging · 30 | Strong · 243 | Moderate · 107 |
| Align Technology Inc | Strong · 153 | Strong · 151 | Strong · 239 | Moderate · 55 | Moderate · 115 |
| Desktop Metal Inc | Strong · 219 | Strong · 157 | Moderate · 46 | Strong · 161 | Moderate · 90 |
| Hewlett Packard Development Company LP | Strong · 148 | Strong · 237 | Moderate · 61 | Strong · 149 | Absent |
| Ricoh Co Ltd | Strong · 122 | Strong · 159 | Absent | Strong · 97 | Strong · 102 |
| Nikon Corporation | Strong · 90 | Strong · 112 | Absent | Strong · 131 | Absent |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus covers 8,704 patent families in scope across the analysis period.
General Electric Co leads with 645 patent families, ahead of Stratasys Inc at 393 and Align Technology Inc at 365.
Annual filings peaked in 2019 at 1,303 and have eased since. Data for 2023 onward are affected by publication lag and should be interpreted cautiously.
The United States is the primary jurisdiction, followed by Europe (EPO) and WIPO (PCT). Germany ranks fourth, reflecting the presence of major German industrial and research organizations in the field.
Align Technology Inc shows the strongest upward momentum among the top filers, with recent filings up +84% versus the prior three-year period. ArcelorMittal SA also shows a positive trend at +59%.
Ceramics and refractories (C04B) at 505 patent records and clay/cement shaping (B28B) at 631 patent records are lower-share branches relative to the dominant additive manufacturing and plastics classes, indicating areas where IP density is comparatively low.
Map your own binder jetting patent landscape
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
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.