Filtered Tailings Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 14 records, then fell -89% from 2021 (9) to 2024 (1), the last year the dataset treats as complete.
- One assignee leads with 17 records against a field of 12 ranked companies, with a sharp drop to fifth place (1) and tenth place (1).
- Flotation and crushing dominate the claim space, at 63.0% and 51.9% of the 27 records respectively, while filtration-specific classes sit under 10%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (9 records) with 2024 (1) — 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.
What the filtered tailings patent record shows
Filtered tailings and dry stacking replace conventional slurry impoundment with a dewatered, stackable tailings mass, removing the need for a water-retaining dam. The 27 records in scope span 2015 to the 2026 cut-off and cluster around the mechanics of getting cake moisture down and cake off the filter without blinding the cloth. Filing activity rose sharply through the late 2010s, peaked in 2020, and has fallen since — a pattern consistent with a technology that saw a burst of claim activity following high-profile tailings dam failures and has since consolidated around a smaller set of active filers.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the low counts shown for 2025 and 2026 understate real filing activity in those years and should not be read as a cooling trend on their own.
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 27-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A sharp rise and fall around 2020
Filing climbed from zero in 2017 to a peak of 14 records in 2020, then declined -89% from 9 records in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the most recent year the dataset treats as complete.
Flotation and comminution carry the claim weight
B03D (flotation) appears in 63.0% of the 27 records and B02C (crushing, grinding and pulverising) in 51.9%, meaning most filings tie dewatering claims to upstream processing steps rather than to filtration equipment alone; B01D (separation processes) covers only 7.4%.
Shares are the percentage of the 27 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Filtered Tailings and Dry Stacking with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about filtered tailings and dry stacking and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
Process of disposal in piles of tailings stemming from the iron ore processing method (US12162025B2)
The patent discloses a process for disposing of iron ore tailings in piles rather than dams: thickening ultra-fine and sandy tailings separately, mixing them in a fixed weight ratio, adding coagulant and flocculant, filtering the mixture, and piling the filtered cake. The stated advantage is that it can be retrofitted onto an existing iron ore concentration plant without changing the process flow.Granted 2024-12-10 to VALE S.A.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20220143624A1 | Dry grinding system and method for reduced tailings dewatering, improving flotation efficiency, producing dri… | 6 |
| 2 | WO2020212876A1 | Dry grinding system and method for reduced tailings dewatering, improving flotation efficiency, producing dri… | 4 |
| 3 | US20220258180A1 | Process of disposal in piles of tailings stemming from the iron ore processing method | 2 |
| 4 | WO2023007436A1 | Mobile paste spreader apparatus for tailings disposal | 1 |
Citation counts reflect a searched corpus and favour older records; treat them as a signal of influence rather than current importance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (4 of 4 rows); 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 filing pattern says about the field
Reading filing volume, IPC spread and citation concentration together points to a technology that moved fast, then settled around a small set of repeat filers.
Filing activity has pulled back from its 2020 peak
Filings rose to 14 records in 2020 and then fell -89% from 9 in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the last year treated as complete. That is a large swing for a 27-record dataset and suggests the initial wave of dewatering and stacking claims has largely been staked out by the current leaders.
Flotation claims dominate the technology mix
B03D (flotation) and B02C (crushing, grinding and pulverising) between them touch the majority of records, meaning filtered tailings claims are frequently bundled with upstream ore-processing steps rather than filed as standalone dewatering or conveying inventions.
One filer sits well ahead of a long tail
The ranked leader holds 17 records against a field of 12 companies, with fifth place already down to 1 record. That gap says a single organisation has built sustained claim depth while most others in the ranking are single- or few-filing entrants.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to filtered tailings and dry stacking, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranking covers all 12 companies the data endpoint returns for this search, not a curated top list. Momentum by assignee shows zero filings in the latest year across the tracked names, consistent with the 18-month publication lag rather than an actual stop in activity.
A single assignee holds the deepest claim position
The leading assignee's 17 records outpace the rest of the ranked field by a wide margin, indicating sustained investment in dewatering and stacking claims rather than a single filing burst.
A steep drop after the leader
Fifth place in the ranking already sits at 1 record, and tenth place is also 1. Most of the ranked companies are single-filing entrants rather than repeat filers.
Canada, Australia and India lead receiving offices
Canada (5), Australia (4) and India (4) account for the largest shares of receiving-office filings, ahead of the United States (3) and WIPO/PCT (3), reflecting where large-scale mining and tailings-dam-replacement projects are concentrated.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| FLSmidth | 0 | — |
| Vale S.A. | 0 | — |
| Alberta Energy Company | 0 | — |
| Hudson's Bay Oil & Gas Company (Canada) | 0 | — |
| ArcelorMittal | 0 | — |
| Petro-Canada | 0 | — |
| PETROFINA CANADA | 0 | — |
| PANCANADIAN PETROLEUM | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific questions worth running deeper before committing a filing strategy or a freedom-to-operate opinion.
Map the leader's full claim scope
With 17 records against a field of 12, the leading assignee likely holds claims across several of the dewatering, conveying and stacking steps. A claim-by-claim map against your own process flow will show which steps are actually blocked.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaCheck the under-10% classes for open space
B01D, B03B and A23C each sit at 7.4% of the 27 records, well below flotation and crushing. That gap may reflect genuine white space or simply that filtration-specific claims are drafted under a different IPC code worth checking directly.
Explore IPC white space in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 filing catch-up
Publication lag means 2025 and 2026 records are still arriving. Re-running this search in six to twelve months will show whether the post-2021 decline holds or whether it was a reporting gap.
Set a filing alert in EurekaFrequently asked questions
Filtered tailings technology removes most of the water from mine tailings using pressure or vacuum filtration, producing a cake that can be transported and stacked without a water-retaining dam. Dry stacking refers to the resulting practice of piling this dewatered cake in engineered stacks rather than storing slurry behind a tailings dam. The patent record in this space concentrates on the mechanics of achieving low cake moisture, keeping the filter cloth from blinding, and moving the cake off the filter and into the stack efficiently.
The ranking returned for this search covers 12 companies, with a single leader holding 17 records and a steep drop to 1 record by fifth place. That pattern indicates one organisation with sustained, multi-year claim depth alongside a long tail of companies that have filed only once or twice in this space. Because the ranking is exhaustive for this search rather than a curated top-50 or top-100, absence from it does not mean a company is inactive elsewhere in tailings management.
Filing activity peaked at 14 records in 2020 and then fell -89% from 9 records in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the most recent year this dataset treats as complete. That is a genuine decline over that window, but patent publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the very low counts shown for 2025 and 2026 are provisional and will rise as more applications publish. A fair read is that the initial wave of filings has passed its peak, not that filing has stopped.
US12162025B2, granted to VALE S.A. in December 2024, covers a specific iron ore tailings disposal process: thickening ultra-fine and sandy tailings separately, combining them in a stated weight ratio, adding coagulant and flocculant, filtering the mixture, and piling the filtered cake in place of a dam. The claimed advantage is that it can be added to an existing iron ore concentration plant without changing the process flow. Anyone working on iron ore tailings disposal with a similar thickening-and-mixing sequence should review this record's specific ratios and reagent steps closely.
IPC classes tied to filtration equipment and separation processes, such as B01D, sit at only 7.4% of the 27 records in scope, well below the 63.0% carried by flotation-related claims. That gap suggests filtration-cloth performance, cake conveying hardware, and stack compaction monitoring are comparatively under-claimed relative to the upstream ore-processing steps most filings bundle their tailings claims with. Confirming this requires checking whether those steps are simply classified elsewhere before treating them as open.
Research Filtered Tailings and Dry Stacking in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole filtered tailings and dry stacking 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.