Fat Modification Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Top 5 filers hold 48.1% of the field. 136 of 283 records in scope sit with five assignees, and the top 10 combined reach 71.0% — a landscape concentrated at the top with a long tail below.
- Filing has gone flat since 2022. The trend peaked at 16 records in 2022 and has not exceeded that midpoint since, with 2026 still partial in this data cut.
- Enzymatic routes now outweigh classic hydrogenation in claim volume. C12P (fermentation & enzymatic synthesis) appears in 44.2% of records against C11C's 69.6%, showing enzymatic interesterification is a heavily claimed alternative, not a niche one.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 283 published records filed between 2015 and 2026 that combine fat hydrogenation, interesterification or fat modification process language with claim terms such as trans fat reduction, enzymatic interesterification, solid fat content profile, nickel catalyst removal and crystallization behavior, classified under C11C3, A23D9 and C12P7. The scope spans both the older chemical route — nickel-catalysed hydrogenation and its trans-fat and catalyst-removal problems — and the enzymatic interesterification route that has displaced much of it in commercial formulation.
Filing activity is concentrated among a small group of food-ingredient and enzyme suppliers, with receiving offices led by Europe and the United States, followed by PCT filings and a scatter of national offices including Australia, Malaysia and Canada. Publication naturally lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent year understates real activity.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 283 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.
Flat since the 2022 peak
Filings ran from 2 in 2017 to a peak of 16 in 2022, and have not risen past that midpoint since; 2026 is a partial year in this cut, so its low count should not be read as a decline.
Enzymatic synthesis rivals classic fat chemistry
C11C (fatty acids & candles) appears in 69.6% of the 283 records and A23D (edible oils & fats) in 54.1%, but C12P (fermentation & enzymatic synthesis) already reaches 44.2% — evidence that enzymatic interesterification claims now sit alongside, not behind, the traditional hydrogenation art. Smaller shares in C12N, A23L, C11B, A23C and A23G mark adjacent formulation and microbial-engineering claims.
Shares are the percentage of the 283 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Fat Modification: Hydrogenation and Interesterification with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about fat modification: hydrogenation and interesterification and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art in this field
Trans fatty acid free fat for frying produced by enzymatic interesterification and method for preparing the same
The filing describes frying oil made by enzymatic interesterification rather than partial hydrogenation, holding trans fatty acid under 1% and palmitic acid under 27% of total fatty acid content while matching the solid fat content and melting point of a partially hydrogenated equivalent.Abstract text as filed; assignee, publication number and date are shown alongside the entry.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6238926B1 | Partial interesterification of triacylglycerols | 127 |
| 2 | US5342768A | Immobilization of thermostable microbial lipase by adsorption to macroporous inorganic carrier particles | 95 |
| 3 | US4940845A | Esterification process of fats and oils and enzymatic preparation to use therein | 86 |
| 4 | US20050276900A1 | Trans free non-hydrogenated hard structural fat and non-hydrogenated hard palm oil fraction component | 58 |
| 5 | EP0652289A1 | Random interesterification of triglyceride fats | 55 |
| 6 | US20040047971A1 | Process for the preparation of a fat composition containing sterol esters a product obtained by said process … | 49 |
| 7 | EP0093602A2 | Interesterification with a lipase enzyme as an interesterification catalyst | 44 |
| 8 | EP0035883A2 | Method for enzymatic interesterification of lipid and enzyme used therein | 39 |
| 9 | WO2007033013A2 | Enzymatic oil interesterification | 36 |
| 10 | EP0209176A1 | Fats and edible emulsions with a high content of cis-polyunsaturated fatty acids | 31 |
Citation counts are pulled from within this searched corpus and favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence on later drafting, not 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 data means for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend line and the IPC mix are read together.
A small group holds most of the claim space
The top 10 assignees account for 201 of 283 records, 71.0% of the field, with the leader alone holding 32 records. A new entrant filing broad hydrogenation or interesterification process claims is filing into occupied ground; differentiation has to come from specific formulation, catalyst-removal or crystallization-control claims rather than the general process.
No recent acceleration among the leaders
The named leading assignees each show zero filings in the latest year in this cut, and the overall trend has not exceeded its 2022 peak. That is consistent with either a maturing claim landscape among incumbents or a reporting lag; either way, recent activity should not be read as growth momentum yet.
Enzymatic routes are a major claim block, not an edge case
C12P (fermentation & enzymatic synthesis) touches 44.2% of records, close behind A23D's edible-oil claims at 54.1%. Any freedom-to-operate review of a new interesterification process needs to clear both the classic fat-chemistry art and the enzymatic-synthesis art side by side.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to fat modification: hydrogenation and interesterification, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space
The ranking covers 95 companies; a handful of ingredient and enzyme suppliers account for most of the volume, and co-filing pairs mark corporate group structures rather than separate competitors.
One filer well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 32 records, roughly double the fifth-place count of 15, setting the pace for both classic hydrogenation clean-up claims and enzymatic process claims.
Corporate groups file jointly
The strongest co-assignee pairing links two entities within the same corporate group at 18 shared records, and a second pairing of enzyme-supplier affiliates reaches 14 — both read as internal group structure rather than competitive collaboration.
A wide tail below the top 10
With 201 of 283 records held by the top 10, the remaining 85 ranked assignees split the other 82 records — a long tail of smaller filers, likely regional processors and single-invention entrants, rather than a dense competitive middle.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Unilever PLC | 0 | — |
| Unilever NV | 0 | — |
| Novozymes A/S | 0 | — |
| Flora Food Global Principal BV | 0 | — |
| Fuji Oil Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Novozymes North America Inc. | 0 | — |
| Cargill Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| CJ Cheiljedang Corp. | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The ranking and trend answer who and how much; the next step is testing a specific claim against this prior art set.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top-cited records
The five most-cited records, led by US6238926B1 at 127 citations, define the baseline art for interesterification and lipase-based processes that most new filings will be compared against.
Explore citation network →Map claim language in the under-claimed branches
Nickel catalyst removal and crystallization-behavior control show thinner coverage than the core process claims, making them worth a closer independent-claim read before drafting.
Search white space →Track the leading assignees for renewed filing
The named leaders show no filings in the latest year of this cut; a fresh pull closer to the 18-month publication lag would show whether that is a real pause or a reporting gap.
Set a monitoring alert →Common questions on fat modification patents
Hydrogenation claims in this dataset (C11C) typically cover nickel-catalysed saturation of fatty acid chains, including catalyst-removal steps, and are the older, more heavily cited art. Interesterification claims, often filed under C12P alongside C11C, cover rearranging fatty acids on the glycerol backbone chemically or enzymatically to change melting and crystallization behaviour without adding hydrogen. In practice, modern filings increasingly favour enzymatic interesterification because it avoids the trans-fat byproduct that chemical hydrogenation creates, and the IPC composition data here shows C12P already present in 44.2% of the 283 records in scope.
The ranking covers 95 companies, dominated by food-ingredient groups and industrial enzyme suppliers rather than a single sector. The leader holds 32 records and the top 10 combined account for 201 of 283 records, 71.0% of the field, so the space is concentrated rather than evenly spread. Several of the strongest filers appear as co-assignee pairs, reflecting shared filings within the same corporate group rather than separate competing entities.
Filing volume rose from 2 records in 2017 to a peak of 16 in 2022 and has not exceeded that level since, based on the trend data through the 2026 cut-off. That reads as flat-to-declining rather than growing, though the most recent year is always understated because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months. A pause among the named leading assignees, each showing zero filings in the latest year, is consistent with either a maturing claim set or an incomplete recent-year record.
The core hydrogenation and interesterification process claims are heavily filed, but adjacent applications carry thinner coverage: dairy-fat interesterification (A23C, 8.8% of records) and confectionery fat fractionation (A23G, 8.1%) both sit well below the core C11C and A23D shares. Specific technical sub-areas such as nickel catalyst removal methods and solid fat content profiling for non-dairy fat systems also show comparatively less dedicated claim density. A first claim in these branches would need to combine the underlying process with a specific end-use fat system to stand apart from the dense core art.
US20100178386A1 claims a frying oil made by enzymatic interesterification that holds trans fatty acid under 1% and palmitic acid under 27% of total fatty acid content, while matching the solid fat content and melting point of a partially hydrogenated equivalent. Anyone developing a comparable enzymatically interesterified frying oil with fatty acid composition limits close to those figures should review this filing's claim scope before finalising a formulation. It does not block hydrogenation-based routes or interesterification processes targeting different fatty acid ratios or end uses outside frying.
Research Fat Modification: Hydrogenation and Interesterification in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole fat modification: hydrogenation and interesterification 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.