Laser Powder Bed Fusion Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
Laser powder bed fusion patent landscape: filing trends across 548 records, assignee concentration, IPC technology mix, receiving offices and key claims — data through 2026.
Filing growth = 2021 (50 records) → 2024 (95); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 548 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What the laser powder bed fusion patent record shows
Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) patent activity spans 548 published records from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, covering the melting, monitoring and control processes used to fuse metal powder layer by layer with a laser. The record set draws on claims tagged to powder metallurgy, additive manufacturing and welding/brazing IPC classes, reflecting a technology that sits at the intersection of metal-part manufacturing and precision laser control.
Filing activity accelerated through the early 2020s and the assignee base includes aerospace manufacturers, laser and additive-manufacturing equipment makers, and research institutions, with protection sought across six receiving offices spanning the US, Europe, China, the PCT route, India and Germany.
Filing trends and technology composition
The dataset spans 548 published records from 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, giving a filing curve and a technology-class breakdown that together show where laser powder bed fusion protection is concentrated and where it is still thin.
A decade of steady, then accelerating, filing
Annual filings rose from 32 in 2017 to a peak of 95 in 2024, including a 90% increase between 2021 (50) and 2024 (95). The 2025 and 2026 figures, including the 18 recorded so far in 2026, are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months — read the recent tail as a floor, not a peak.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
Powder metallurgy and additive manufacturing dominate the class mix
Powder metallurgy (B22F) and additive manufacturing (B33Y) each appear on roughly seven in ten of the 548 records, with welding/brazing (B23K) and alloys (C22C) as secondary but substantial classes. Because records can carry several IPC classes at once, these shares sum to well over 100% — the chart is a coverage map, not a pie chart of exclusive categories.
Shares are the percentage of the 548 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Laser Processing & Applications: Laser Powder Bed Fusion Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about laser processing & applications: laser powder bed fusion patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art and a representative recent filing
US12397376B2 — Off-axis laser beam measurement for laser powder bed fusion
Disclosed herein is a laser beam measurement system that includes a beam measurement device, a positioning apparatus, and a control system. The beam measurement device can include an imager and a plurality of optical elements configured to form an optical path to the imager within the beam measurement device. The positioning apparatus is configured to adjust a position of the beam measurement device relative to a build plate of a laser powder bed fusion system. The control system is configured to determine an intended measurement position to observe a laser beam profile of the laser powder bed fusion system, determine a target position of a beam measurement device to align with the intended position.Granted to RTX Corporation, 2025-08-26 — illustrates how beam-measurement claims are currently being drafted around positioning and control logic rather than the imaging sensor itself.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20170120337A1 | Methods and Systems for Coherent Imaging and Feedback Control for Modification of Materials | 231 |
| 2 | US20160158889A1 | Control of solidification in laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing using a diode laser fiber array | 183 |
| 3 | US20150071809A1 | Powder distribution in additive manufacturing of three-dimensional articles | 178 |
| 4 | US20160167160A1 | Method for additive manufacturing | 163 |
| 5 | US20150174695A1 | Method for additive manufacturing | 126 |
| 6 | US20170341141A1 | Method for additive manufacturing | 66 |
| 7 | US20170348792A1 | Method for additive manufacturing | 63 |
| 8 | US20150174822A1 | Apparatus and method for adjusting and controlling the stacking-up layer manufacturing | 60 |
| 9 | US20180257141A1 | Methods for Fabricating Strain Wave Gear Flexsplines Using Metal Additive Manufacturing | 57 |
| 10 | US9505057B2 | Powder distribution in additive manufacturing of three-dimensional articles | 55 |
Citation counts favour older documents simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus; treat them as a signal of influence on the field's early technical direction, not as a ranking of current 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 numbers mean for strategy
Four figures from this dataset carry direct implications for where to file, who to watch, and which branches still have room.
Leadership is real but not dominant
The leading filer holds 37 records out of 548, and the top 5 combined hold 23.0% of all records in scope. That leaves more than three-quarters of the field distributed across a long tail of smaller filers, including national labs and equipment makers.
Momentum is accelerating, not plateauing
Complete-year filings rose from 50 in 2021 to a peak of 95 in 2024. The apparent dip in 2025-2026 reflects publication lag of roughly 18 months rather than declining filing activity.
Process control claims dominate the field
Powder metallurgy and additive manufacturing classes each cover over two-thirds of the 548 records, while data-processing and testing classes sit under 5%, marking a clear gap between hardware claims and software/analytics claims.
US leads, but filing is genuinely international
The US receiving office leads with 209 records, followed by EPO, China, WIPO PCT, India and Germany, showing protection strategies that span the major industrial patent offices rather than a single home jurisdiction.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to laser processing & applications: laser powder bed fusion patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC | Seurat Technologies, Inc. | 6 |
| Mott Corporation | Mott Corporation | 1 |
Only two co-assignee pairs appear in this dataset, indicating that most laser powder bed fusion patents are filed by a single assignee rather than through joint filing arrangements.
Where to take this analysis next
The figures above establish the shape of the field. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means drilling into specific claim sets and specific competitors.
Check freedom to operate against the leading filers
With the top 10 ranked filers holding 35.0% of the 548 records in scope, a targeted claim comparison against those portfolios is the fastest way to find out whether a planned design overlaps existing coverage.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaDraft into the under-claimed branches
Data-processing, testing and ceramics-adjacent classes each cover under 5% of records, well below the 70%+ carried by core powder and additive-manufacturing classes — a starting point for claim drafting with less prior art to design around.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the filing curve past its 2024 peak
Filings rose 90% from 2021 to 2024; watching how 2025-2026 fill in over the next 18 months of publication lag will show whether that momentum is holding or cooling.
Set up a filing alert in EurekaFrequently asked questions
The assignee ranking in this dataset covers 100 companies counted by patent family, with the leading filer holding 37 records. The top 5 filers together account for 23.0% of the 548 records in scope, and the top 10 account for 35.0%, which means concentration exists at the top but a long tail of smaller filers still holds the majority of the field. Filers named in the ranking include aerospace, additive-manufacturing equipment, and national-lab entities, reflecting the technology's roots in both aerospace metal parts and academic/government research.
Yes, based on complete years: filings grew from 50 in 2021 to 95 in 2024, a 90% increase over that three-year span, and 2024 is the most recent year that can be treated as a complete data point. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look lower only because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so those years are still filling in rather than showing a real slowdown. Anyone using the recent tail to judge momentum should treat it as a floor, not a signal of declining interest.
Powder metallurgy (IPC class B22F) and additive manufacturing / 3D printing (B33Y) are by far the most claimed, appearing on 71.9% and 69.9% of the 548 records respectively. Welding, soldering and brazing (B23K) and alloy composition (C22C) follow as substantial secondary classes at 36.3% and 20.8%. Digital data processing, ceramics/clay shaping, and materials testing classes each cover under 5% of records, marking them as comparatively under-claimed relative to the core process and materials classes.
The United States leads as a receiving office with 209 records, ahead of the European Patent Office (91), China (81), the WIPO PCT route (69), India (26) and Germany (11) in this dataset. This spread indicates the technology is being protected across the major industrial patent offices rather than concentrated in a single jurisdiction, consistent with a technology used across aerospace, medical device and industrial manufacturing supply chains that span multiple regions.
US12397376B2, assigned to RTX Corporation and granted 2025-08-26, claims an off-axis laser beam measurement system combining a repositionable beam measurement device, a positioning apparatus, and a control system that determines where to measure the beam profile. It specifically blocks off-axis beam-profiling setups that pair automated repositioning with a control loop deciding measurement position — it does not cover coaxial melt-pool imaging, which is a separate and more heavily cited line of prior art in this dataset, nor fixed-position beam measurement installations. Anyone building an off-axis, repositionable measurement feature for an LPBF system should review this claim set closely; other sensing approaches have more room.
The clearest under-claimed branches by IPC coverage are digital data processing (G06F, 4.6% of 548 records), materials testing and analysis (G01N, 4.0%), and ceramics/clay-adjacent shaping (B28B, 4.4%) — all well below the 70%+ coverage of the core powder and additive-manufacturing classes. This points to opportunity in quality-inference and post-process inspection methods rather than in the build-process hardware itself, where filing density is already high. A first claim in this space would likely be framed as a data-processing or testing method rather than an apparatus claim, since the apparatus space is comparatively crowded.
Research Laser Processing & Applications: Laser Powder Bed Fusion Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole laser processing & applications: laser powder bed fusion patent landscape 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.