Cosmetic Preservation Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Filings nearly tripled from 2021 to 2024, up +200% over that three-year span, though the leader's own recent-year count has flattened to zero, signalling a plateau at the very top even as the field keeps growing.
- The top 5 assignees hold 30.7% of all 524 records, but the ranking runs 100 companies deep with a long tail of single-digit filers below tenth place — this is a field with a head, not a monopoly.
- A23L and A23B together cover roughly seven in ten records, leaving biocide-class A01N and oil/fat-class A23D filings under 10% each — a signal of where preservation chemistry claims are still comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (9) — 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 524 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families addressing cosmetic and adjacent product preservation — preservative systems, challenge testing, preservative-free claims, water activity control, multifunctional ingredients, packaging hygiene, mould efficacy and regulatory-listed actives. The dataset spans records published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawing on 524 records across the assignee ranking, IPC composition and receiving-office filings that make up the rest of this page.
Because the underlying search string pulls in both cosmetic-labelled filings and the food, dairy and pharmaceutical preservation science that underpins them, the IPC composition below skews toward A23-class food chemistry. Readers focused strictly on cosmetics should treat the food and feed classes as adjacent prior art rather than direct competitors — the same antimicrobial and water-activity mechanisms recur across both.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 524-record set: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings rose from 5 in 2017 to a peak of 18 in 2020, then climbed again from 3 in 2021 to 9 in 2024 — a +200% increase over that span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent bars will keep rising as later filings publish.
IPC subclass composition
A23L (foods and non-alcoholic beverages) appears in 48.9% of records and A23B (food preservation) in 23.7%, making food-adjacent preservation chemistry the dominant share. A61K (medicinal preparations) sits at 16.6%, while A01N (biocides) and A23D (edible oils and fats) each fall under 10% — smaller footprints that mark comparatively less crowded claim space. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum to more than 100% of the 524 records.
Shares are the percentage of the 524 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Cosmetic Preservation and Microbiological Safety with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cosmetic preservation and microbiological safety and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited records
Preservative Systems for Extending Shelf Life of Food Intermediates Through Microbial and Enzymatic Control in Non-Modified Atmosphere
A preservation system for extending the shelf life of a farinaceous food intermediate having a water activity greater than 0.75, comprising a chelating agent, at least an antimicrobial acid, and a reducing agent. The filing also describes the method of preparing such intermediates and the resulting products with extended shelf life.Filed by General Mills; published 2008-03-20 as US20080069928A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20080233183A1 | Topical formulations having enhanced bioavailability | 153 |
| 2 | US8454945B2 | Topical formulations having enhanced bioavailability | 103 |
| 3 | US20120263826A1 | Encapsulation system for protection of probiotics during processing | 74 |
| 4 | US6132786A | Long-term mold inhibition in intermediate moisture food products stored at room temperature | 65 |
| 5 | US20060172048A1 | Food preservation systems | 64 |
| 6 | WO2008116135A2 | Topical formulations having enhanced bioavailability | 56 |
| 7 | US4446161A | Aromatic, monohydric alcohols as preservatives for foods | 52 |
| 8 | US4789553A | Method of thermally processing low-acid foodstuffs in hermetically sealed containers and the containers havin… | 44 |
| 9 | US5683737A | Mayonnaise and dressing compositions having a glucono-delta-lactone preservative system | 43 |
| 10 | US20100319424A1 | Systems and processes for producing biofuels from biomass | 41 |
Citation counts are strongest for older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations within this corpus — read them as a signal of influence, not of current relevance.
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 indicate
Three patterns stand out once concentration, technology mix and citation data are read together.
A visible head, not a monopoly
The leading assignee holds 42 records against a fifth-place count of 26 and a tenth-place count of 16 — a clear gradient rather than a cliff. With 100 companies in the ranking, most of the field's activity sits in a long tail of small filers working narrower claims.
Recent acceleration, not steady growth
Annual filings jumped from 3 in 2021 to 9 in 2024, well above the field's earlier 2020 peak of 18 in absolute count terms once multi-year context is included. Because 2025–2026 records are still publishing, this recent surge is the last year that can be read as a complete signal.
Influence concentrated in older bioavailability filings
The most-cited records in this set date to the 2000s and address topical bioavailability and mold inhibition rather than recent preservative-free or water-activity claims. That gap between citation weight and filing recency is typical of a searched corpus and should not be read as those older claims still being the most commercially active.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cosmetic preservation and microbiological safety, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| PepsiCo, Inc. | Massey University | 11 |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | WISLER PETER | 4 |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | FARAGHER JOHN | 4 |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | WILLIAMS GRAHAM | 3 |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | HAUGAN KERSTI | 3 |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | HARDY JAY | 3 |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | DELVES BROUGHTON JOSS | 3 |
| American National Can Co. | Kendall McGaw Laboratories | 3 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data; the strongest pairing links two organisations with 11 shared records, well ahead of the next pairings at 4 each — suggesting one collaboration produced a sustained joint filing programme rather than a series of one-off co-filings.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders span food, dairy, pet nutrition and packaging companies rather than a single cosmetics-only cohort, reflecting how far preservation science claims spill into adjacent product categories.
Breadth over a single mechanism
The leading assignee's filings span multiple preservation mechanisms rather than one patented chemistry, consistent with a company defending a product-line-wide claim position rather than a single molecule or method.
Recent-year filings have gone quiet at the top
Several of the most active historical filers, including the field leader, show zero filings in the latest recorded year. Given the ~18-month publication lag, this is at least partly a data-timing artefact rather than a confirmed pullback, but it means recent competitive activity may be understated for exactly the companies that dominate the ranking.
One standout joint-filing relationship
Co-assignee activity is otherwise sparse — nine of the ten identified pairs share only 4 records or fewer — meaning most organisations in this field file independently rather than through joint ventures or research partnerships.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| General Biscuit SA | 0 | -100% |
| International N&H Denmark ApS | 0 | — |
| American National Can Co. | 0 | — |
| Naturex SA | 0 | — |
| PepsiCo, Inc. | 0 | — |
| PAPER PAK IND | 0 | — |
| Kraft Foods, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Berg LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The patterns above point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy or white-space filing.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leaders
With 47.3% of the 524 records held by the top 10 assignees, a freedom-to-operate review should prioritise those portfolios before broader searching, particularly around the mechanisms named in their most-cited filings.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaTest claim language in the under-claimed branches
Preservative-free substantiation and water-activity-triggered release show comparatively thin IPC-class density relative to A23L and A23B, making them worth a targeted novelty search before drafting.
Run a white-space search in EurekaTrack the 2024–2026 filing wave as it publishes
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the full picture of 2025–2026 activity will keep filling in; a re-run of this search in a few quarters will sharpen the recent-momentum picture.
Set up monitoring in EurekaFrequently asked questions
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 42 of the 524 records in scope, with the fifth-ranked company at 26 and the tenth-ranked at 16. That gradient shows a clear leader rather than a single dominant monopoly, and the ranking runs to 100 companies with a long tail of single- and double-digit filers below the top ten. Anyone assessing competitive position should look at the full ranking rather than just the top name, since a meaningful share of filings sits outside the leading cluster.
The IPC composition shows A23L (foods and non-alcoholic beverages) covering 48.9% of the 524 records and A23B (food preservation) covering 23.7%, versus A61K (medicinal preparations) at 16.6%. This reflects how the underlying preservation science — antimicrobial acids, water activity control, chelating agents — is shared across food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic applications rather than being cosmetic-specific. Readers focused strictly on cosmetics should treat the food-class share as adjacent prior art rather than direct market competition.
Filings grew from 3 in 2021 to 9 in 2024, a +200% increase over that span, following an earlier peak of 18 in 2020. The 2025 and 2026 figures in the dataset are still incomplete because patent publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so those most recent years will continue to rise as more records publish. Based on the complete years available, the trend through 2024 is one of acceleration rather than decline.
US20080069928A1, filed by General Mills, claims a preservation system for farinaceous food intermediates with water activity above 0.75, combining a chelating agent, an antimicrobial acid and a reducing agent. It is specific to that water-activity threshold and ingredient combination, so it does not block preservation systems built around different water-activity ranges, different active-ingredient classes, or non-farinaceous matrices. Anyone working near this space should read the claims against their own water-activity target and ingredient chemistry rather than assuming blanket coverage.
The technology composition shows A01N (biocides, 9.5% of 524 records) and A23D (edible oils and fats, 6.7%) as the smallest classes among those tracked, suggesting comparatively less claim density than the dominant A23L and A23B classes. Combined with a co-assignee network that is sparse outside one strong pairing, this points to open ground in packaging-hygiene mechanisms, multifunctional-ingredient dual claims, and preservative-free substantiation methods. A targeted novelty search in those specific branches, rather than the crowded food-preservation core, is the more efficient use of drafting effort.
Research Cosmetic Preservation and Microbiological Safety in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cosmetic preservation and microbiological safety 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.