Expanded TPU Midsole Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 88.6% concentration. The top five assignees hold 405 of the 457 records in scope — a field with almost no long tail left to search.
- One leader dominates outright. The top-ranked assignee alone accounts for 302 records, more than six times the fifth-place filer's count of 14.
- Filing is still climbing, not cooling. 2021-to-2024 filings rose 17%, and 2025 figures are still filling in under normal publication lag — this is not a maturing field yet.
Filing growth compares 2021 (29 records) with 2024 (34) — 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 457 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What's actually being claimed
Expanded thermoplastic polyurethane (E-TPU) and bead foam midsole patents sit at the intersection of shoe sole design and plastics processing. The dataset spans 457 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, built around claim language covering bead fusion, steam moulding, compression set, energy return and midsole weight. Most records touch both a footwear classification and a plastics-shaping one, which is the structural signature of this technology: the claims describe a shoe part, but the invention is usually a moulding or foam-bead process.
Ownership of this claim space is unusually concentrated. A single assignee holds close to two-thirds of all records, and the next four leaders account for most of what remains, leaving only a thin scatter of single- or double-digit filers behind them. That pattern matters for freedom-to-operate work: a new entrant is not searching a diffuse field, they are searching one dominant portfolio plus a handful of adjacent ones.
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 457-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings peaked at 44 in 2017, the earliest full year in scope, and have moved unevenly since. The 2021-to-2024 span shows a 17% rise (29 to 34), the most recent stretch that publication lag allows to be read as complete; 2025 and 2026 figures will keep rising as later publications land, so they should not be read as a slowdown.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A43B (footwear) covers 63.0% of the 457 records and B29C (shaping of plastics) covers 37.6% — together they confirm that most inventions here are moulding processes claimed through a footwear application. Narrower classes like C08L (polymer compositions, 6.1%) and A63B (sports equipment, 10.1%) are comparatively thin, which is where composition- and application-specific claim space still has room.
Shares are the percentage of the 457 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Expanded TPU and Bead Foam Midsoles with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about expanded tpu and bead foam midsoles and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art in this field
Expanded thermoplastic polyurethane particles and expanded thermoplastic polyurethane particle molded article
Provided are expanded beads capable of providing an expanded thermoplastic polyurethane beads molded article which is excellent in physical properties, such as compression characteristics, repulsion elasticity, etc., and an expanded thermoplastic polyurethane beads molded article. Expanded beads of thermoplastic polyurethane, wherein a Shore A hardness of the thermoplastic polyurethane is 85 or more; an average cell diameter of the expanded beads is 50 to 300 μm; and a closed cell ratio when bisecting the expanded thermoplastic polyurethane bead is 60% or more; and an expanded thermoplastic polyurethane beads molded article obtained through in-mold molding of the same are disclosed.Filed by JSP Corporation, published 2018-06-07 as US20180155518A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20130291409A1 | Soles for sports shoes | 337 |
| 2 | EP2649896A2 | Soles for sports shoes | 312 |
| 3 | US20160374428A1 | Soles for sport shoes | 273 |
| 4 | US9610746B2 | Methods for manufacturing cushioning elements for sports apparel | 211 |
| 5 | US20160037859A1 | Shoe sole | 196 |
| 6 | US20160227876A1 | Method for the manufacture of a plastic component, plastic component, and shoe | 178 |
| 7 | US20180035755A1 | Soles for sports shoes | 174 |
| 8 | US20180154598A1 | Method for the manufacture of a plastic component, plastic component, and shoe | 171 |
| 9 | US9781974B2 | Soles for sports shoes | 151 |
| 10 | US20160044992A1 | Co-molded 3D elements | 144 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — read these as markers of influence on later filings, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
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 filer
Three figures set the shape of this field: how tight ownership is, how the technology splits between footwear and materials claims, and how filing has actually moved once publication lag is accounted for.
Ownership is not diffuse
Five assignees hold 405 of the 457 records in scope. A freedom-to-operate search here is realistically a search of a handful of portfolios, not a broad field scan.
Still an active filing area
Filings rose from 29 in 2021 to 34 in 2024, the last year publication lag allows to be treated as complete. That is growth, not a technology winding down.
Footwear claims wrap process claims
Most records carry both a footwear classification and a plastics-shaping one, confirming that the underlying inventions are largely moulding and bead-fusion processes claimed through a shoe application.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to expanded tpu and bead foam midsoles, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Wolverine Outdoors, Inc. | Wolverine International LLC | 3 |
| BASF SE | BASF Coatings GmbH | 1 |
| BASF SE | LIU KAI | 1 |
Only three co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest pair recurs just three times — most filings here are single-assignee, not joint ventures or supplier partnerships.
Who holds the claim space
The ranking covers 26 companies in total — this is the complete assignee ranking the dataset returns, not a top-50 or top-100 cut. One filer dominates by volume; most of the rest hold single-digit counts.
One assignee dominates by volume
The top-ranked assignee holds 302 of 457 records — more than six times the fifth-place count of 14. Any competitive read of this field starts with that one portfolio.
A short second tier
Places two through five hold meaningfully fewer records than the leader but still far more than the rest of the ranking, forming a compact second tier worth tracking for licensing or acquisition signals.
Recent activity has gone quiet across most leaders
Several of the ranked leaders show zero filings in the latest tracked year, consistent with publication lag rather than an actual stop in R&D — recent filings simply have not published yet.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Adidas AG | 2 | -85% |
| BASF SE | 0 | — |
| Huntsman International LLC | 0 | — |
| Wolverine Outdoors, Inc. | 0 | — |
| BEHNAMIAN SHAHRIAR | 0 | -100% |
| JSP Corporation | 0 | — |
| Wolverine International LLC | 0 | — |
| Proprietect LP | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a concentrated field with a compact second tier and a technology still in an active filing phase. The next steps depend on whether the goal is clearance, licensing or R&D direction.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 302 of 457 records, any new filing or product in this space should be checked against that portfolio first, then the compact second tier.
Explore the leader's claims in EurekaTrack the under-claimed branches before they fill in
Composition-specific and mould-geometry claims remain comparatively thin relative to the core footwear and moulding classes, and filing activity overall is still rising.
Map white space in EurekaCommon questions about this field
It is highly concentrated. Across the 457 records in scope, the top five assignees together hold 405 records, or 88.6% of the field, and the top ten reach 95.2%. That leaves a very thin long tail — most of the 26 ranked companies hold only a handful of filings each, so a competitive or freedom-to-operate review realistically focuses on a small set of portfolios rather than a broad field of independent filers.
Filing activity rose 17% between 2021 and 2024, from 29 to 34 records, which is the most recent span that can be treated as complete given normal publication lag of roughly 18 months. Years 2025 and 2026 currently show lower counts, but that reflects filings still working through the publication pipeline rather than an actual drop in R&D activity. Judged on the last complete years, this remains an active filing area.
A43B covers footwear itself and appears on 63.0% of the 457 records, while B29C covers the shaping of plastics and appears on 37.6%. In practice, most inventions in this dataset are moulding or bead-fusion processes that get claimed through a footwear application, which is why the two classes overlap heavily on the same records rather than representing two separate populations of patents.
The thinner classes point to it: C08L, covering polymer compositions, appears on only 6.1% of records, and A63B, covering sports-specific equipment claims, on 10.1%. Mould cavity geometry for bead foam parts and closed-cell ratio control are also comparatively under-claimed relative to the dominant footwear and general moulding classes. These narrower, more technically specific claim types are where a new entrant has more room to stake an independent position rather than working around the dominant portfolio.
US20180155518A1, filed by JSP Corporation and published in 2018, claims expanded TPU beads defined by specific physical parameters — Shore A hardness of 85 or more, average cell diameter of 50 to 300 micrometres, and a closed-cell ratio of 60% or more — along with the in-mould molded article made from them. Any bead foam midsole product whose material falls inside those numeric ranges and is produced by in-mould molding needs a claim-by-claim comparison against this filing before commercial release, since it is one of the more specific composition-plus-process claims in the dataset.
Research Expanded TPU and Bead Foam Midsoles in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole expanded tpu and bead foam midsoles 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.