Food Extrusion Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing activity peaked in 2021 at 11 records and has since flattened, with the leader still filing well ahead of a long tail of single-digit filers.
- Protein and shaping classes dominate A23J (proteins & peptides) and A23P (food shaping) each cover over two-thirds of the 63 records in scope, while dough handling and grinding sit under 10%.
- The most-cited records are two decades old the top two citation leaders both concern meat manufacture methods, meaning current cooling-die and screw-configuration filings are still building citation weight.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 63 published records filed against food extruders, high-moisture extrusion processes, and food texturization equipment, filtered to documents that also address screw configuration, die design and fibre formation, specific mechanical energy, cooling dies, or throughput. The scope spans 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, so the most recent filing year is understated because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
The dataset sits at the intersection of protein-focused chemistry classes and mechanical shaping equipment classes, which is why a single record commonly carries multiple IPC codes. Receiving-office data shows filing activity concentrated in the United States, WIPO/PCT and Europe, with smaller volumes reaching Canada, the UK and New Zealand.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 63-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Volume rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 11 records in 2021, held near the 2022 midpoint of 4, then eased off. The 2026 figure reads as zero because it is a partial year at the data cut-off, not a stop in filing.
IPC subclass composition
A23J (proteins & food peptides) appears in 74.6% of the 63 records and A23P (food shaping/forming) in 68.3%, confirming that most filings combine a protein-chemistry angle with a mechanical-forming angle. B29C (plastics shaping), A23L (foods & beverages) and A23K (animal feed) trail behind, and dough handling (A21C) and crushing/grinding (B02C) are the smallest classes tracked, each under 10% of records.
Shares are the percentage of the 63 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Food Extrusion and Texturization Equipment with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about food extrusion and texturization equipment and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited and most representative filings
Adjustable Height Cooling Die for High Moisture Extrusion Food Processing Including an Automatic Feedback Loop
A system for high moisture extrusion (HME) food processing using an adjustable height cooling die including an automatic dynamic HME feedback loop is described herein. The system comprises a feeding system, a barrel with at least one screw, and an adjustable height cooling die for shaping a food product with output product conditions, tied to an electronic sensor system that closes the feedback loop on HME parameters.Filed by The Livekindly Company Switzerland GmbH, published 2022-06-30 as US20220202060A1.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6635301B1 | Method and apparatus for the manufacture of meat | 98 |
| 2 | WO2000069276A1 | Method and apparatus for the manufacture of meat | 92 |
| 3 | CN1350433A | 用于肉代用品生产的方法和装置 | 27 |
| 4 | US7275927B2 | Multi-channel cooling die | 21 |
| 5 | JP1994062821A | Extruding production of unpuffed fine stringy food and cooling die | 20 |
| 6 | US20040247760A1 | Multi-channel cooling die | 15 |
| 7 | CN1522193A | 多通道冷却模 | 9 |
| 8 | EP1182937A1 | Method and apparatus for the manufacture of meat | 6 |
| 9 | WO2020079440A1 | Food alternative product and process | 5 |
| 10 | AU2002315573B2 | Multi-channel cooling die | 5 |
Citation counts favour older documents in any searched corpus; treat these as signals of influence on the field rather than as a ranking of current importance. Two of the top-cited records concern methods and apparatus for meat manufacture, and a fine-stringy-food cooling die from the 1990s still ranks among the most cited on record.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 filing strategy
Three read-throughs from the trend, class composition and citation data that should shape where a new filing sits.
Growth has flattened, not stopped
Activity built steadily to a 2021 peak of 11 records, then eased back toward the 2022 midpoint of 4. Combined with the 18-month publication lag, this reads as a maturing filing wave rather than an exiting field.
Protein chemistry sits under nearly every filing
Three in four records in scope touch A23J (proteins & food peptides), and over two-thirds touch A23P (food shaping/forming). A filing that avoids both classes is filing into genuinely open ground.
The influence baseline predates high-moisture extrusion equipment
The two most-cited records both concern methods and apparatus for meat manufacture rather than the cooling-die and screw-configuration mechanics that define recent filings, so newer mechanical-design patents have not yet had time to accumulate comparable citation counts.
Filing is US/PCT/EPO-led with a thin secondary tier
The United States, WIPO and Europe lead receiving-office counts, with Canada, the UK and New Zealand each in single digits. A PCT or EPO-first strategy still reaches the bulk of documented competitive activity.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to food extrusion and texturization equipment, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gate sits
The ranked leaders in this dataset cover 10 companies, from a leader with 20 records down to a tenth-place filer with 1. Recent-year momentum across the tracked leaders reads as zero in the latest year for every one of them, consistent with the flattening trend and the publication lag on the most recent filings.
A single leader, then a steep drop to single digits
The leading assignee holds 20 records against a fifth-place count of 3 and a tenth-place count of 1. That gap suggests one organisation has built a dense claim position while the remaining ranked filers each hold a narrow slice.
Co-filing is rare and narrow
Only two co-assignee pairings appear in the data, each linking a single named inventor to one of the larger corporate filers. Most records in this space are filed by a sole assignee rather than through joint ventures.
No leader shows fresh-year volume yet
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum shows zero records in the latest year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this understates real filing activity rather than signalling that the leaders have stopped.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Mars, Incorporated | 0 | — |
| Ever Fresh Foods Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| THE LIVEKINDLY CO SWITZERLAND GMBH | 0 | — |
| PLANT MEAT LTD | 0 | — |
| NIKRIS APS | 0 | — |
| The Japan Steel Works, Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Bühler AG | 0 | — |
| LUSOASIS INC | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The composition and citation data point to specific next steps for teams deciding where to file or where to watch.
Map the leader's claim boundaries
With one assignee holding 20 of the ranked records, a claim-chart comparison against that portfolio is the fastest way to find where a new filing would actually clear.
Explore assignee portfoliosTrack the cooling-die citation lineage
The most-cited records anchor on meat-manufacture methods and multi-channel cooling dies; newer filings citing them are worth monitoring as the next influence wave builds.
Trace citation networksWatch the under-claimed classes
Dough handling and crushing/grinding sit under 10% of records each. A technology that combines either with high-moisture extrusion has comparatively little prior art to design around.
Run a white space searchCommon questions about food extrusion patents
Within this dataset of 63 records, the ranked leaders span 10 companies, with the top-ranked assignee holding 20 records versus a fifth-place count of just 3. That gap between the leader and the rest of the ranking suggests one organisation has built a materially denser claim position than any other single filer tracked here. It does not mean that company controls the whole field, since the ranking only covers the assignees the data endpoint returns, not every filer in existence.
High moisture extrusion (HME) refers to a processing route, commonly used for plant-based meat analogues, where a protein feedstock is extruded at elevated moisture content and then shaped through a cooling die to create fibrous texture. Patent claims in this space typically combine equipment elements, such as barrel screw configuration and cooling die geometry, with process parameters like specific mechanical energy and throughput. The representative filing in this dataset, US20220202060A1, claims an adjustable-height cooling die tied to an automatic feedback loop for exactly this kind of process.
Patent publication typically lags the actual filing date by around 18 months, so any filing made close to the data cut-off of 2026-07-31 will not yet appear as a published record. The zero shown for the most recent year reflects that lag, not an actual stop in filing activity. Readers should treat the last one to two years of any patent trend as understated for this reason.
In this 63-record dataset, A23J (proteins & food peptides) appears in 74.6% of records and A23P (food shaping/forming) in 68.3%, making them the two dominant classes. B29C (shaping of plastics) at 38.1% and A23L (foods & non-alcoholic beverages) at 30.2% follow, reflecting the mechanical and formulation sides of the same equipment. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these percentages add up to more than 100%, so they should be read as coverage shares rather than a breakdown that sums to the whole.
The thinnest classes in this dataset are A21C (dough handling machines) at 7.9% of records and B02C (crushing, grinding & pulverising) at 9.5%, both well below the 74.6% and 68.3% coverage of the two leading classes. That gap suggests fewer competing claims around dough-handling integration with extrusion screws, or pre-treatment grinding stages feeding into high-moisture extrusion. A first filing combining either of those thinner classes with the dominant protein-shaping claim language would face comparatively less prior art to design around.
Research Food Extrusion and Texturization Equipment in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole food extrusion and texturization equipment 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.