Cross-Belt & Tilt-Tray Sorter Patents: Who Leads, Gaps 2026
- 86.4% of all 81 records sit with the five leading assignees, while the ranked leader alone accounts for 32 records — this is a concentrated field, not a fragmented one.
- Filing is flat, not growing, with 2021 and 2024 both at 4 filings — a 0% span — and 2019 still the peak year on record at 8.
- B65G and B07C dominate, covering 63.0% and 49.4% of records respectively, while image/video recognition (G06V) touches only 3.7% — a thin, recent layer on a mechanically mature base.
Filing growth compares 2021 (4 records) with 2024 (4) — 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 81 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this field actually covers
Cross-belt and tilt-tray sorters move parcels and totes by carrying them on individually addressable segments — belts or trays — that discharge a unit at a designated chute along a closed travel loop. The patent activity tracked here concentrates on the mechanical and control problems that make that discharge reliable: carrier pitch, induction station geometry, discharge accuracy, linear motor drive systems, chute design, and sorter reliability more broadly. These are not incremental UI features; they are the physical claims that determine throughput and jam rates on a working sortation line.
The 81 records in scope span 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, filed mostly through the United States, EPO and PCT routes, with a visible tail through the UK, Australia and Canada receiving offices. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the last one to two years in any trend understate real activity — the 2019 peak and the 2021–2024 comparison are the more reliable read.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 81 records: how filing has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A flat trend after an early peak
Filings peaked at 8 in 2019 and have not returned to that level. The 2021-to-2024 comparison — 4 filings to 4 filings, a 0% span — is the most complete recent read available; treat 2025 and 2026 as still filling in rather than as a decline.
Mechanical handling still carries the field
B65G (conveying and material handling) appears in 63.0% of the 81 records and B07C (postal and object sorting) in 49.4%, confirming the core claims are mechanical. Control systems (G05B, 12.3%) and image/video recognition (G06V, 3.7%) sit well behind, marking where software and vision layers are still thin.
Shares are the percentage of the 81 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Cross-Belt and Tilt-Tray Sorter Design with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about cross-belt and tilt-tray sorter design and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaWhat the most-cited and most recent filings show
Cross belt sorter carrier measurement and magnet detection tools
A carrier evaluation system mounted beneath a cross-belt sorter's travel path measures the upward distance to each carrier as it passes, checking carrier height and the presence of magnets used for carrier tracking. A paired-sensor arrangement extends the same principle to additional measurements along the same path.Filed by DEMATIC S.R.L., published 2025-09-18 — a maintenance and diagnostics claim layered onto existing carrier hardware rather than a new sortation mechanism.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20170043953A1 | Automated materials handling facility | 317 |
| 2 | US6246023B1 | Segmented tilt tray sorter | 186 |
| 3 | US6459061B1 | Segmented conveyor sorter | 62 |
| 4 | US9600798B2 | Automated materials handling facility | 58 |
| 5 | US4982828A | Sortation conveyor | 46 |
| 6 | US4856642A | Sortation conveyor | 46 |
| 7 | US6499604B1 | Compound induction system | 39 |
| 8 | US20140142746A1 | Dynamic discharge compensation for a sortation system | 34 |
| 9 | US9150362B2 | Dynamic discharge compensation for a sortation system | 26 |
| 10 | US20090272859A1 | High Density Mail Sorting Cart | 24 |
Citation counts favour older filings inside any searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a measure of current commercial 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 mean for a filing decision
Three readings of the same dataset, each pointed at a different question a filing team actually has to answer.
The core mechanism is already claimed by a few players
With the top 5 of the 14 ranked assignees holding 86.4% of all 81 records, and the leader alone at 32, the carrier, induction and discharge mechanics of cross-belt and tilt-tray sorters sit on dense, well-defended prior art. New entrants filing on the core mechanism are filing into occupied space.
Activity has plateaued since the 2019 peak
Filing peaked at 8 records in 2019 and has since settled to a flat pace — 4 filings in both 2021 and 2024. That plateau, not a decline, is the honest reading once the 18-month publication lag is accounted for in the most recent years.
Mechanical claims dominate; vision and control are thin layers
B65G conveying claims cover 63.0% of records and B07C sorting claims 49.4%, while image/video recognition (G06V) reaches only 3.7%. Control systems (G05B, 12.3%) and manipulators/robots (B25J, 8.6%) are similarly light, suggesting the mechanical envelope is settled but the sensing and software layer around it is not.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to cross-belt and tilt-tray sorter design, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the field, and where the momentum has stopped
Fourteen assignees make up the entire ranked field for this search, and the top five already account for the large majority of records.
One assignee holds roughly two out of every five records
The leading assignee's 32 records, against 81 total, sets a high bar for anyone trying to file around the core sortation mechanism rather than around a peripheral feature such as diagnostics or induction timing.
A steep drop after the leaders, then a long tail
Fifth place holds 5 records and tenth place only 2 — the field narrows quickly outside the top five, and the top 10 together already cover all 81 records in scope, meaning there is no unranked long tail left to discover in this dataset.
Recent-year activity has gone quiet across the board
Several of the ranked assignees, including Tompkins Robotics and Dexterity, show zero filings in the latest year with a -100% year-on-year change. Given the publication lag, this reads as a reporting gap for the newest filings rather than confirmed withdrawal from the space.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligrated Headquarters LLC | 0 | — |
| TOMPKINS ROBOTICS INC | 0 | -100% |
| Figgie International Inc. | 0 | — |
| Dexterity Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| SIEMENS ELECTROCOM | 0 | — |
| Amazon Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Siemens AG | 0 | — |
Where to take this from here
The dataset points to a mechanically settled core and a thinner sensing/software layer around it — two different filing strategies follow from that.
Check freedom-to-operate on carrier mechanics before filing
With 86.4% of records held by five assignees, any claim touching carrier pitch, tilt geometry or induction timing needs a freedom-to-operate check against the leader's portfolio specifically, not just the field average.
Run a freedom-to-operate search in EurekaTrack the diagnostics and sensing layer for openings
G06V and G05B remain thin relative to the mechanical classes, and the featured 2025 filing shows at least one incumbent already moving into carrier-level sensing — worth monitoring before the space fills in.
Set up monitoring in EurekaRe-check the 2025–2026 filings once they clear the publication lag
The flat 2021–2024 trend could shift once the partially reported 2025–2026 years complete; revisit the trend in six to twelve months rather than treating the current plateau as final.
Explore the full filing trend in EurekaCommon questions on cross-belt and tilt-tray sorter patents
It is highly concentrated. The top five of the 14 ranked assignees hold 86.4% of all 81 records in scope, and the single leading assignee accounts for 32 of those records on its own. The top 10 assignees together cover 100.0% of all records, meaning there is effectively no unranked long tail left in this particular search — anyone new to the field is filing against a small, well-established set of incumbents rather than a fragmented market.
Filing has plateaued rather than grown or collapsed. The peak year on record so far is 2019, with 8 filings, and the most reliable recent comparison — 2021 versus 2024 — shows 4 filings in each year, a 0% change. Because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, the very latest years in any dataset like this will always look artificially low, so treat 2025 and 2026 figures as incomplete rather than as evidence of decline.
The core of the field is mechanical: B65G (conveying and material handling) appears in 63.0% of the 81 records and B07C (postal and object sorting) in 49.4%, covering carrier movement, induction and discharge geometry. Supporting layers are thinner — control systems (G05B) reach 12.3%, manipulators and robotics (B25J) 8.6%, and image or video recognition (G06V) only 3.7% — which points to sensing and vision as the less-claimed part of the stack.
US20250289673A1, filed by Dematic S.r.l. and published 2025-09-18, covers a sensor-based tool that measures carrier height and detects missing tracking magnets from beneath the travel path of a cross-belt sorter. It is a diagnostics and maintenance claim layered onto existing carrier hardware, not a claim on the core sortation mechanism itself, so it constrains carrier-monitoring approaches specifically rather than blocking sorter design broadly. Anyone building a similar sub-carrier sensing rig for height or magnet detection should review its claim scope closely before proceeding.
The evidence points to the sensing and software layer around the mechanical core rather than the core itself: vision-based discharge verification, induction-station singulation timing, and chute-level jam detection are all adjacent to dense mechanical claims but sit under IPC classes (G06V, G05B) with comparatively low coverage across the 81 records. A first claim in this space would likely combine an existing mechanical carrier or chute design with a specific sensing or verification method, rather than attempting to claim a new carrier mechanism outright.
Research Cross-Belt and Tilt-Tray Sorter Design in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole cross-belt and tilt-tray sorter design 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.