Catalytic Reforming Materials Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- Filing activity has flattened since its 2018 peak. 19 families filed that year against just 4 in 2017, but the midpoint year (2022) sits at the same level as the peak — the field is not accelerating.
- C10G and B01J dominate the classification mix. 601 and 462 of 639 records respectively touch hydrocarbon refining and catalysis IPC codes, meaning most claim activity overlaps these two subclasses rather than spreading into adjacent chemistry.
- Co-filing is rare and concentrated. Only 10 co-assignee pairs exist across the dataset, with the strongest pairing appearing just 12 times — most work here is filed by a single assignee acting alone.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 639 patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine catalytic reforming, fluid catalytic cracking or hydrocracking process claims with catalyst material claims — zeolite cracking catalysts, bifunctional reforming catalysts and catalyst support materials specifically. The scope is defined by IPC codes B01J29/00, B01J23 and C10G11, which together anchor the dataset in catalysis and hydrocarbon oil refining rather than upstream extraction or downstream fuel formulation.
Publication figures for the most recent one to two years are understated because patent applications typically publish around 18 months after filing; 2025 and 2026 counts will rise as later filings surface. Treat the recent-year numbers as a floor, not a ceiling.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and classification spread
Two views of the same 639 families: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those filings distribute across IPC subclasses.
A peak in 2018, then a plateau
Filings rose from 4 in 2017 to a peak of 19 in 2018. Rather than continuing upward, the 2022 midpoint sits at the same 19, indicating the field has been flat-to-declining for several years rather than in a growth phase.
Concentration in refining and catalysis codes
C10G (hydrocarbon oils and refining, 601 records) and B01J (chemical and physical processes including catalysis, 462 records) account for the overwhelming majority of activity. Separation processes (B01D, 50), acyclic and carbocyclic compounds (C07C, 30) and inorganic compounds (C01B, 14) appear as much smaller side branches, with control systems (G05B, 9) barely represented.
Shares are the percentage of the 639 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Industrial Catalytic Reforming Advanced Materials with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about industrial catalytic reforming advanced materials and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe documents that anchor this field
Two-phase fluid catalytic cracking system using dual zeolite catalyst particles
A fluid catalytic cracking process and apparatus employing relatively more elutriatable catalyst particles comprising intermediate pore zeolite (particularly ZSM-5) alongside relatively less elutriatable catalyst particles comprising large pore zeolite (preferably zeolite Y). A first stripping vessel separates the two catalyst populations by elutriation behaviour; the more elutriatable fraction recycles through a second stripping vessel back into the FCC reactor riser, while the less elutriatable fraction follows a separate path.Filed by Mobil Oil Corporation, published 1988 — one of the field's foundational dual-zeolite FCC records.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US3770614A | Split feed reforming and n-paraffin elimination from low boiling reformate | 286 |
| 2 | US4422925A | Catalytic cracking | 232 |
| 3 | US4830728A | Upgrading naphtha in a multiple riser fluid catalytic cracking operation employing a catalyst mixture | 186 |
| 4 | US4973399A | Catalytic cracking of hydrocarbons | 143 |
| 5 | US6482315B1 | Gasoline sulfur reduction in fluid catalytic cracking | 138 |
| 6 | US4985136A | Ultra-short contact time fluidized catalytic cracking process | 127 |
| 7 | US4436613A | Two stage catalytic cracking process | 125 |
| 8 | US20020003103A1 | Fluid cat cracking with high olefins prouduction | 122 |
| 9 | US5389236A | Method and apparatus for controlling introduction of catalysts into FCC units | 117 |
| 10 | US3886060A | Method for catalytic cracking of residual oils | 100 |
Citation counts reward older filings that have had more time to accumulate references; they signal historical influence on claim drafting, not 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 filing pattern signals
Three read-throughs from the trend, classification and citation data that matter for anyone deciding whether and where to file.
Growth has stalled since 2018
The peak filing year (2018, 19 families) has not been exceeded since; the 2022 midpoint sits at the identical count. This is a mature, flat filing pattern rather than an emerging one — new entrants are filing into a field where claim space around core FCC and reforming catalyst compositions is already dense.
Two subclasses carry almost everything
Nearly all activity sits inside hydrocarbon refining (C10G) and catalysis (B01J) codes, with separation processes and organic chemistry appearing only at the margins. That narrow spread suggests the dominant claim strategies have already been explored inside the core codes.
Foundational art still anchors drafting
The most-cited records date back decades — US3770614A, US4422925A and US4830728A among them — and continue to shape how later claims are drafted around split-feed reforming and multi-riser FCC operation. New filings need freedom-to-operate review against this older, still-influential art, not just recent publications.
Collaboration is the exception
Only 10 co-assignee pairings exist across the dataset and the strongest appears in just 12 records. Most families here are filed by a single assignee, which means joint-venture or licensing-driven filing strategies are not the norm in this space.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to industrial catalytic reforming advanced materials, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee landscape and momentum
Filing in this field concentrates among a small set of major oil and catalyst companies, with recent-year activity slowing across nearly all of them.
Concentrated among legacy refiners
The ranking is led by companies with long histories in catalyst and refining chemistry rather than new entrants, consistent with a field where core claim space was staked out years ago.
Latest-year filing has gone quiet
Of the assignees tracked for recent-year momentum, only one shows any filing in the latest year (1 family, 0% YoY); the rest show none. Given the 18-month publication lag, some of this understates true 2025–2026 activity, but the pattern still points to a slowdown at the top.
Partnerships are narrow and specific
Where co-filing does occur, it clusters around a small number of long-standing pairings rather than a broad web of collaboration, suggesting joint filings reflect specific commercial relationships rather than industry-wide alliance patterns.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| BASF Corporation | 1 | 0% |
| W.R. Grace & Co. | 0 | — |
| Mobil Oil Corporation | 0 | — |
| UOP LLC | 0 | — |
| Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) | 0 | — |
| ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company | 0 | — |
| Texaco Development Corporation | 0 | — |
| Ashland Oil, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a mature, concentrated field with narrow but persistent white space. These are reasonable next steps for a team deciding where to file or invest.
Run freedom-to-operate against foundational art
The most-cited records in this corpus date back to the 1970s–1990s and still anchor claim drafting in split-feed reforming and multi-riser FCC design. Any new filing in these areas should be checked against them directly, not just against recent publications.
Explore prior art in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
Support material recyclability and control-system integration (G05B overlap) show comparatively thin filing density inside this scope. A first claim drafted around measurable recyclability or automated regeneration control has more room to stand apart from the dense core.
Draft claims in EurekaTrack the top assignees' next moves
With most tracked assignees showing no recent-year filings, a shift by any one of them would be a meaningful signal. Ongoing monitoring of the leading filers is more useful here than a one-time snapshot.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The ranking is led by a small group of established oil-refining and catalyst companies rather than newer entrants, reflecting decades of continuous filing in this space. Names appearing at the top of the assignee ranking include large integrated oil companies and dedicated catalyst manufacturers. Recent-year momentum data shows most of these leaders filing few or no new families in the latest tracked year, so leadership in cumulative volume does not currently translate into leadership in fresh activity.
No — filing peaked at 19 families in 2018 and the 2022 midpoint sits at the same level, indicating a flat-to-declining trend rather than growth. Because publications lag filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in the dataset will rise somewhat as later filings surface, but the underlying multi-year pattern is one of plateau, not expansion. Anyone evaluating this space should treat it as mature rather than emerging.
C10G (hydrocarbon oils and refining processes) and B01J (chemical and physical processes including catalysis) dominate, covering 601 and 462 of the 639 records respectively. Smaller but relevant classes include B01D for separation processes and C01B for inorganic compound chemistry, which matter for catalyst support formulations. A freedom-to-operate search limited to B01J or C10G alone would miss meaningful adjacent claim activity in these smaller classes.
US4787967A, assigned to Mobil Oil Corporation and published in 1988, covers a two-phase fluid catalytic cracking process that separates catalyst particles by elutriation behaviour — intermediate-pore zeolite (ZSM-5) particles versus large-pore zeolite (zeolite Y) particles — using a first and second stripping vessel arrangement. Its claims are specific to that dual-catalyst, dual-vessel elutriation separation design, so it does not block single-catalyst FCC systems or designs that separate catalyst fractions by a different mechanism. Anyone designing a two-catalyst FCC riser system with elutriation-based separation should review this record's claim scope closely before finalizing a vessel design.
The classification data shows filing heavily concentrated in core C10G and B01J codes, with much thinner activity in adjacent areas such as control-system integration for catalyst regeneration (G05B, only 9 records) and inorganic support co-formulation (C01B, 14 records). These thinner branches represent comparatively under-claimed territory relative to the dense core process and catalyst-composition claims. A first claim tying measurable support-material recyclability or automated regeneration control to a specific catalyst chemistry would sit in genuinely less-crowded space.
Research Industrial Catalytic Reforming Advanced Materials in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole industrial catalytic reforming advanced materials 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.