https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/enzyme-granulation-and-dust-control-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Industrial Enzymes
Enzyme granulation and dust control patents: concentration, technology mix and open claim space
  • 93.8% of all 353 records sit with just five assignees — this field is not a long tail story, it is a five-way contest.
  • Detergent and feed overlap heavily, with 54.1% of records tagged to animal feed (A23K) and 47.0% to detergents (C11D) on the same 353-record base.
  • Filings fell 50% from 2021 to 2024, the last year the trend can be read as complete before publication lag takes over.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
353
Published Records
94%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-50%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
EP
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (16 records) with 2024 (8) — 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 353 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview

What this landscape covers

Enzyme granulation and dust control sits at the intersection of formulation chemistry and process engineering: turning an active enzyme into a free-flowing, low-dust solid that survives handling, blending and storage without losing activity. The claim space spans coating layers, fluid bed granulation parameters, mechanical strength testing and aerosol reduction methods, alongside the underlying enzyme chemistry itself. Because the same granule technology serves detergent, animal feed, food and baking applications, a single patent family often carries claims that read across several end markets.

The dataset in scope covers 353 published records filed or published between 2015 and 2026, drawn from a search string anchored on granulate and dust-control terminology combined with process and performance limitations. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so figures for 2025 and 2026 will keep rising as later filings publish; the 2024 filing count is the most recent year that can be read as settled.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1NOVOZYMES AS178
  2. 2PROCTER & GAMBLE CO76
  3. 3BASF SE38
  4. 4NOVO NORDISK AS20
  5. 5HENKEL KGAA19
  6. 6NOVO IND AS6
  7. 7GENECOR INC5
  8. 8DANISCO US INC4
  9. 9MARKUSSEN ERIK KJR4
  10. 10AB ENZYMES GMBH3
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology

Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.

10,000 free credits to start
The Data

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 353 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.

Filing trend, 2017-2026

Filings ran from a single record in 2017 to a peak of 30 in 2018, then eased; the tracked span from 2021 (16 filings) to 2024 (8 filings) shows a 50% decline over three years. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a continuation of the decline.

Filing trend, 2017-20260815233012017302018201920202021202220232024202542026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

IPC subclass distribution

Animal feed (A23K) and detergents (C11D) dominate, at 54.1% and 47.0% of the 353 records respectively, with microorganism and genetic engineering claims (C12N) present in 30.9%. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum to well over 100% and should be read individually against the 353-record base, not against each other as parts of a whole.

IPC subclass distributionA23K · Animal feed19154.1%C11D · Detergents & cleaning composit…16647.0%C12N · Microorganisms & genetic engin…10930.9%A61K · Medicinal preparations287.9%A23L · Foods & non-alcoholic beverages164.5%A21D · Baking; doughs154.2%A23P · Food shaping/forming82.3%B01J · Chemical/physical processes & …51.4%Other174.8%

Shares are the percentage of the 353 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 Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about enzyme granulation and dust control and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

Most-cited records and a representative filing

Representative Filing
CA2254985C1997-11-20

CA2254985C — Enzyme granulate for washing and cleaning

GENENCOR INTERNATIONAL, INC.

The preparation of an activity-stable and low-dust enzyme granulate for washing and cleaning applications, e.g., for use in granular washing and cleaning agent compositions, is described. Also described are the activity-stable and low-dust enzyme granulates obtained in accordance with the method of preparation as well as their use in washing and cleaning applications. In addition, in a special aspect of the invention, the use of specially selected flours entirely generally as auxiliary agents (e.g., vehicles or fillers) for the preparation of enzyme granulates for diverse application purposes is described.Filed by Genencor International; illustrates how early granulate claims tied activity stability and dust reduction to specific filler selection rather than to coating chemistry alone.

View full record
Highest-citation records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US4106991AEnzyme granulate composition and process for forming enzyme granulates2,314
2US4661452AEnzyme containing granulates useful as detergent additives1,918
3WO2006034710A1Enzyme granules386
4WO2010090915A1Detergent composition364
5EP0304332A2Enzyme containing granulate and method for production thereof324
6WO1990009440A1Enzyme containing granulate and method for production thereof314
7EP0304331A2Method for production of an enzyme granulate290
8WO1997016076A1Feed enzyme preparations212
9WO2001025412A1Enzyme granulate155
10WO2008017659A1Enzyme granules for animal feed151

Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations; treat this table as a map of foundational influence, not of current filing activity.

Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. 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
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 →
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 a filing decision

Three findings that shape where a new filing would sit relative to existing claim density.

Concentration
93.8% / 353
top five share of all records

Five assignees hold the field

Combined, the top five assignees account for 93.8% of all 353 records in scope, and the top ten account for 100.0%. This is not a fragmented field with a long tail of small filers; it is a small group of incumbents who between them have claimed essentially the entire published record set.

Ranking covers 42 companies total
Technology overlap
54.1% + 47.0%
A23K and C11D share of 353 records

Feed and detergent claims overlap

Animal feed (A23K) appears in 54.1% of records and detergents (C11D) in 47.0%, well ahead of the 30.9% carrying microorganism and genetic engineering claims (C12N). A granule technology developed for one channel is highly likely to read on claims filed for the other.

Shares sum above 100% because records carry multiple IPC codes
Filing momentum
-50%
2021 to 2024 filings

Activity cooled through the tracked period

Filings dropped from 16 in 2021 to 8 in 2024, a 50% decline over that three-year span, after peaking at 30 in 2018. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, the 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete and should not yet be read as confirming or reversing that trend.

2024 is the last complete year in the trend
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 enzyme granulation and dust control, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players

Who is filing, and where the momentum sits now

Two of the leading assignees show measurable recent-year activity; most of the historic leaders show none in the latest tracked year, which is consistent with a mature claim position rather than fresh filing.

Leader
178
records

A dominant single filer

The leading assignee holds 178 of the 353 records in scope, far ahead of fifth place at 19 and tenth place at just 3. That gap defines the shape of this field: one incumbent, a small group of active challengers, and a steep drop after that.

Fifth place: 19 records; tenth: 3
Momentum
2 / -33%
latest-year filings, YoY

Novozymes still filing, but down

Novozymes recorded 2 filings in the latest year, a 33% year-on-year decline, while Procter & Gamble held flat at 2 filings with 0% YoY change. The remaining historic leaders in this ranking, including BASF, Novo Nordisk and Henkel, show zero filings in the latest tracked year.

Recent-year momentum by assignee
Collaboration
10
co-assignee pairs

Co-filing concentrates around one player

Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the three strongest pairs all involve the same corporate assignee filing jointly with different named inventors, each pair appearing three times. This points to sustained internal inventor teams rather than cross-company joint development.

Strongest pairs each appear 3 times
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth checking before filing
Branches with comparatively thin representation across the 353-record base, based on the IPC composition and the concentration pattern above.
Catalysis-linked granulation (B01J overlap)Food-shaping/forming granule formats (A23P)Baking-dough enzyme carriers (A21D)Aerosol-reduction measurement methodsCross-channel feed-to-detergent coating transfer
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Novozymes A/S2-33%
Procter & Gamble Co.20%
BASF SE0
Novo Nordisk A/S0
Henkel KGaA0
NOVO IND AS0
Genencor International, Inc.0
Danisco US Inc.0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. 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 next questions rather than final answers — each one is a narrower search than the field-wide view above.

Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's 178 records

With one assignee holding just over half the field, any new filing in coating chemistry or fluid bed process claims needs a targeted clearance search against that portfolio specifically, not just the field average.

Run a freedom-to-operate search

Track whether 2025-2026 filings reverse the decline

The 2021-2024 drop of 50% is real, but the most recent two years are still filling in under normal publication lag. Revisit the trend once 2025 filings are substantially published.

Set a filing alert

Map the under-claimed branches to your own formulation

Catalysis-linked, food-shaping and baking-dough granule claims sit far below the detergent and feed density seen elsewhere in this dataset — worth a closer look if your work touches those channels.

Explore white space in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions on enzyme granulation patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Enzyme Granulation and Dust Control in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole enzyme granulation and dust control corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.