Lactose-Free Dairy Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Top 5 filers hold 58.6% of all 186 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 87.6% — this is a field with a short, dominant list of assignees rather than a long tail.
- Filings grew 175% from 2021 to 2024 (4 to 11 records), the clearest complete-year growth signal in the dataset before publication lag makes 2025–2026 look artificially quiet.
- A23C and C12N dominate the claim space at 65.1% and 43.5% of records respectively, while animal feed applications (A23K) sit at just 3.8% — a visible gap next to a crowded core.
Filing growth compares 2021 (4 records) with 2024 (11) — 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 186 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this patent landscape covers
This landscape covers 186 published records filed against lactose-free milk and lactase-treatment claims, spanning enzyme dosing, sweetness increase from lactose hydrolysis, residual lactose thresholds, treatment sequence, shelf stability and labelling thresholds. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, though publication lag means the most recent one to two years are still filling in. Patent families, not raw document counts, are used throughout so that multi-jurisdiction filing by the same applicant does not inflate any single company’s position.
Filing activity is concentrated around a small number of ingredient and dairy-processing specialists, with dense claim coverage on the core dairy-composition class and a much thinner presence in adjacent areas like animal feed and medicinal preparations. The receiving-office spread — Europe, Australia, the US, PCT, Canada and New Zealand all represented in double digits or close to it — points to a technology being protected across multiple regulatory regimes at once, consistent with a food category where labelling thresholds for residual lactose differ by jurisdiction.
Filing trends and technology composition
The two views below cut the same 186-record dataset by year and by IPC subclass, showing when the field was active and which parts of the technology it claims most heavily.
Filing trend: a sharp early peak, then a slower rebuild
Filings peaked at 52 records in 2018, the high point in the whole 2017–2026 window, before dropping off. The 2021-to-2024 span shows renewed, complete-year growth of 175% (4 to 11 records) — the most reliable recent signal, since 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a slowdown.
Technology composition: dairy and microbiology dominate
A23C (dairy products) appears in 65.1% of the 186 records and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) in 43.5%, together forming the technical core of enzyme-treated dairy. A23L (foods generally), C07K (peptides and proteins) and G01N (material analysis and testing) each sit in the 9–14% range, while A23K (animal feed) trails at 3.8% — a class count that adds to more than 100% because records can carry multiple IPC codes.
Shares are the percentage of the 186 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Lactose-Free and Enzyme-Treated Dairy with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about lactose-free and enzyme-treated dairy and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
Milk powder composition (US20240074447A1, Valio Ltd, filed 2024-03-07)
A lactose free milk powder composition including a citrate preparation, a method for its production, and a method for producing a lactose free low sugar acidified milk product using the lactose free milk powder composition.Representative of a current filing pattern: pairing a lactose-free base with a specific stabilising additive (here, citrate) rather than claiming lactose hydrolysis alone.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4956186A | Process for the production of low calorie yogurt | 77 |
| 2 | US7829130B2 | Process for producing a lactose-free milk product | 42 |
| 3 | WO2015193449A1 | Method of producing a fermented milk product with reduced residual lactose concentration | 41 |
| 4 | WO2020117548A1 | Use of lactase to provide high GOS fiber level and low lactose level | 38 |
| 5 | EP2530148A1 | Novel beta-galactosidases useful for the production of lactose depleted milk products | 35 |
| 6 | WO2015086746A1 | A method for preparing a dairy product having a stable content of galacto-oligosaccharide(s) | 34 |
| 7 | WO2008136671A1 | Low-calorie milk products | 33 |
| 8 | US20130230623A1 | Milk product and preparation method | 23 |
| 9 | WO2020176734A1 | Method for reducing lactose at high temperatures | 13 |
| 10 | WO2015107050A1 | Improved enzyme variants of lactase from kluyveromyces lactis | 12 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references — treat this as a measure of influence within the corpus, not 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 concentration and trend data mean
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend line and the IPC composition are read together.
A short list of assignees controls most of the field
The top 5 filers account for 58.6% of all 186 records and the top 10 for 87.6%. With 29 companies in the full ranking, that leaves a modest number of records spread across the remaining 19 — a field where a new entrant is more likely to be designing around a handful of established portfolios than navigating dozens of scattered small filers.
Growth resumed after the 2018 peak
After peaking at 52 records in 2018, annual filings fell before rebuilding: 2021's 4 records grew to 11 by 2024, a 175% increase over that span. Because publication lag runs about 18 months, 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as the trend reversing.
Dairy composition claims are dense; feed applications are not
A23C (dairy products) appears in 65.1% of records and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) in 43.5%, marking the crowded core of the field. A23K (animal feed) appears in only 3.8% of records, suggesting enzyme-treatment techniques proven in human dairy have not been heavily re-claimed for feed applications yet.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to lactose-free and enzyme-treated dairy, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where they are not
The leader in this ranking holds 26 records against a fifth-place figure of 17 and a tenth-place figure of 8 — a steep drop-off that confirms the concentration seen in the top-5 and top-10 shares. Co-assignee activity is limited to 8 pairs total, with one Australian pairing (Agritechnology and Ingredient Advisory Services) filing jointly far more often than any other combination, pointing to a tight collaboration rather than an industry-wide norm.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 26 records, noticeably ahead of the fifth-place figure of 17, and the gap widens further by tenth place (8 records). This is a field where the leading position is defensible rather than contested by a cluster of near-equal rivals.
Joint filing is rare and concentrated in one relationship
Only 8 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest pairing — between two Australian entities — recurs far more often than any other. Most assignees in this field file independently rather than through joint ventures.
Recent-year activity has thinned across the board
Momentum data shows only one assignee with any filing in the latest year, and several established filers, including one with a -100% year-on-year change, show none. This is consistent with publication lag rather than an actual pullback, since 2025–2026 records are still being published.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| International N&H Denmark ApS | 1 | — |
| AGRITECHNOLOGY PTY LTD | 0 | — |
| Valio Ltd | 0 | — |
| DSM IP Assets B.V. | 0 | — |
| Kerry Group Services International Ltd | 0 | -100% |
| Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) | 0 | — |
| Novozymes A/S | 0 | -100% |
| Chr. Hansen A/S | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a concentrated field with specific open branches. Two directions make sense depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate or identifying a filing opportunity.
Map claims against the leading portfolios
With the top 10 assignees holding 87.6% of the 186 records in scope, a freedom-to-operate check should start with those portfolios rather than a broad novelty search across all 29 ranked filers.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaScope a filing in an under-claimed branch
Animal feed applications (A23K, 3.8% of records) and treatment-sequence claims sit next to a dense core without matching filing density, which is where a defensible first claim is more likely to be available.
Run a white-space search in EurekaCommon questions about lactose-free dairy patents
The dataset's assignee ranking shows one company clearly in front, with 26 records against 17 at fifth place and 8 at tenth. The top 5 assignees together account for 58.6% of all 186 records in scope, and the top 10 account for 87.6%, so filing activity is concentrated among a small group of ingredient and dairy-processing specialists rather than spread evenly across the 29 companies in the ranking. Anyone assessing this space should treat those leading portfolios as the primary reference point rather than trying to track all 29 filers equally.
Complete-year data shows growth: filings rose from 4 records in 2021 to 11 in 2024, a 175% increase over that three-year span, after an earlier peak of 52 records in 2018. The years 2025 and 2026 appear lower in the raw trend line, but that reflects publication lag of roughly 18 months rather than an actual drop in filing activity. Judging the trend on the strength of the most recent one to two years would understate real activity, so the 2021–2024 window is the more reliable growth signal.
A23C, the dairy products classification, appears in 65.1% of the 186 records in scope, and C12N, covering microorganisms and genetic engineering, appears in 43.5% — together these form the technical core around lactase enzymes and lactose-hydrolysed dairy products. Smaller but still notable shares include A23L (foods generally) at 13.4%, C07K (peptides and proteins) at 11.8%, and G01N (material analysis and testing) at 9.1%. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% of the record total, which is expected and not a data error.
The clearest gap sits between the dense dairy and microbiology core and its lightly-claimed neighbours: A23K, the animal feed classification, appears in only 3.8% of the 186 records, far below A23C's 65.1%, suggesting enzyme-treatment techniques proven in human dairy products have not been heavily re-claimed for feed applications. Treatment-sequence and residual-lactose-threshold claims also show thinner coverage relative to the core composition claims. A first claim in either of these branches would face less prior art than one targeting the core dairy-composition space directly.
US20240074447A1, assigned to Valio Ltd and filed in 2024, claims a lactose-free milk powder composition that includes a citrate preparation, along with methods for producing the powder and for producing a lactose-free low-sugar acidified milk product from it. It is a representative example of a current filing pattern that pairs a lactose-free base with a specific stabilising additive rather than claiming lactose hydrolysis in general. Because the claim is tied to the citrate-preparation combination and the acidified-product method, it constrains that specific formulation route rather than lactose-free milk powder production broadly, leaving room for alternative stabiliser chemistries.
Research Lactose-Free and Enzyme-Treated Dairy in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole lactose-free and enzyme-treated dairy 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.