Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/liquid-crystal-polymer-molding-process-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Polymers & Composites · Patent LandscapeLiquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process Patents
- Filing has plateaued, not grown. Annual filings peaked at 24 in 2021 and have since declined toward single digits, with the midpoint year (2022) already back down to 15 — this is a maturing claim space, not an expanding one.
- Japan and Europe outfile the US. Japan (149 records) and the EPO (146) both lead the United States (114) as receiving offices, meaning freedom-to-operate analysis built only on US filings will miss most of the prior art.
- The oldest citations still carry the most weight. The two most-cited records date to 1993 and 1997, and a 1984 extrusion patent still draws 134 citations — foundational molding and self-reinforcement claims from the 1980s-90s remain the reference point examiners return to.
570
Published Records
26%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-79%
3-Yr Growth (lag-adjusted)
JP
Leading Jurisdiction
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 570 patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026 at the intersection of liquid crystal polymer chemistry and shaping processes — injection molding, thin-wall molding, film extrusion and melt processing — indexed under IPC classes covering polymer compositions (C08L), plastics shaping (B29C) and polymer additives (C08K). It is not a survey of LCP chemistry generally; the search string requires both the material and a molding or processing step in the claims or description, so it isolates process-linked filings rather than raw resin composition work.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures in any trend line are undercounts rather than a genuine drop-off — treat the most recent one to two years as provisional until the next data refresh.
Filing activity and IPC composition, 2017-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 570-family dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A plateaued filing curve
Filings rose from 19 in 2017 to a peak of 24 in 2021, then eased back to 15 by 2022 and continued down toward single digits by the most recent (partial) year. Read this as a mature, well-picked-over claim space rather than a shrinking one — molding process improvements around an established resin class tend to arrive in smaller increments once the core routes are patented.
Where the claims concentrate
Polymer compositions (C08L, 368 records) and plastics shaping (B29C, 298) dominate, with additives (C08K, 199) and processing/solutions (C08J, 118) forming a second tier. Laminates (B32B, 77) and condensation polymer chemistry (C08G, 83) sit at the edges — smaller but not negligible bodies of art worth checking before filing composite or layered-LCP claims.
Shares are the percentage of the 570 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about liquid crystal polymer molding process and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey patents
The documents examiners keep citing
Representative filing
US5260380A — Self-reinforced composite and process for preparing same
UNIVERSITY OF AKRON, THE
Describes melt blending a matrix LCP with a fiber-forming second LCP under high-strain mixing to induce in-situ fiber formation, then shaping the blend by injection molding or extrusion at a temperature set between the two polymers' processing windows so the fiber-forming phase retains its fibrous morphology in the finished part.Filed by the University of Akron; issued 1993-11-09.
View full recordMost-cited records in this corpus
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5275877A | Self reinforced thermoplastic composite laminate | 170 |
| 2 | US5719354A | Monolithic LCP polymer microelectronic wiring modules | 159 |
| 3 | US4468364A | Process for extruding thermotropic liquid crystalline polymers | 134 |
| 4 | US5268225A | Self reinforced thermoplastic composite laminate | 81 |
| 5 | US4966807A | Multiaxially oriented thermotropic polymer films and method of preparation | 64 |
| 6 | US6010760A | Thermoplastic resin composition, injection molding method thereof, and injection molded article | 61 |
| 7 | US6063848A | Liquid crystalline polymer composition and moldings | 58 |
| 8 | US5260380A | Self-reinforced composite and process for preparing same | 54 |
| 9 | US5006402A | Wholly aromatic polyester fiber-reinforced high performance thermoplastic and process for preparing same | 53 |
| 10 | US4332759A | Process for extruding liquid crystal polymer | 52 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references — treat this table as a map of influence on later claim drafting, not a ranking of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-throughs from the trend, geography and citation data above.
Filing momentum
24 → 15 → 3
peak (2021) → midpoint (2022) → latest partial year
The growth phase is over
A peak in 2021 followed by a steady decline through 2022 and beyond signals that the core molding routes for LCP — injection molding of thin-wall parts, film extrusion, melt blending for self-reinforcement — are largely staked out. New filings now are more likely to be incremental process tweaks than foundational claims.
Confirm against the next data refresh before treating the latest year as a real decline.
Jurisdiction spread
JP 149 · EP 146 · US 114
records by receiving office
Japan and Europe lead, not the US
Japanese and European filings each outnumber US filings in this corpus. Any freedom-to-operate check limited to USPTO art will miss over half the relevant prior art — Japanese resin makers and European compounders have been the more active filers on molding process claims.
China (48) and PCT (31) filings are smaller but growing reference points for regional strategy.
Citation depth
134-170 citations
on the top five most-cited records
Foundational art is decades old
The most-cited documents span 1984 to 1997 and cover extrusion of thermotropic LCPs and self-reinforced composite laminates. Claims that touch fiber-forming in-situ blends or oriented thermotropic films should expect examiners to cite this cluster regardless of filing year.
High citation count signals influence on later drafting, not current market activity.
Co-filing pattern
10 co-assignee pairs
strongest pair: 6 shared filings
Collaboration is limited and concentrated
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear across the whole dataset, and the strongest single pairing accounts for just six shared filings. Most LCP molding process patents in this corpus are filed by a single assignee working alone, with joint filing the exception rather than the norm.
Co-filing here tends to pair a resin supplier with a smaller processing or material specialist.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to liquid crystal polymer molding process, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who holds the claim space — and where it's still open
Recent-year filing activity across the named assignees below has dropped to zero for the most recent tracked year across the board, consistent with the corpus-wide plateau rather than any single company exiting the field.
Filing pattern
0 filings
latest tracked year, across all leading assignees
Momentum has stalled at the top
Every one of the leading named assignees in the recent-momentum data shows zero filings in the latest tracked year. That is consistent with the corpus-wide plateau after 2021 rather than a single company's retreat — the whole molding-process niche has gone quiet at once.
Watch for a rebound once 18-month publication lag clears the 2025-2026 backlog.
Co-filing
6 shared filings
strongest assignee pair in the dataset
Resin suppliers pair with specialists
The strongest co-assignee pairing in this corpus links a major LCP resin producer with a materials-processing partner, at six shared filings — the largest joint-filing relationship found, though still modest against 570 total families.
Most other pairings in the dataset sit at two shared filings.
Citation legacy
1984-1997
filing dates of the five most-cited records
Legacy assignees still anchor the art
The most heavily cited patents in this space were filed by composite and materials-science originators in the 1980s and 1990s. Newer entrants drafting claims around self-reinforcement or oriented thermotropic film need to design around this older, still-live citation cluster.
Citation weight favours age; check current assignee status separately.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Polyplastics Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Celanese Corporation | 0 | — |
| Nippon Petrochemicals Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| The University of Akron | 0 | — |
| Unitika Ltd. | 0 | — |
| E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company | 0 | — |
| Sumitomo Chemical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Denka Company Limited | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next
Where to take this
The dataset points to two practical next steps depending on whether you are clearing a filing or scouting a gap.
Run a freedom-to-operate check across JP and EP art
With Japan and Europe each outfiling the US in this corpus, a US-only FTO search on LCP molding claims is incomplete. Pull the Japanese and European family members of the most-cited records before drafting new claims.
Explore assignee families in EurekaMap the under-claimed film and laminate branches
In-situ fibrillated blends, oriented film for high-frequency substrates and laminate interlayer bonding all show thinner filing density than the C08L/B29C core. These are candidate spaces for a first-mover claim rather than a design-around.
Run a white-space search in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on LCP molding process patents
The most-cited records in this corpus — covering self-reinforced thermoplastic composite laminates and thermotropic LCP extrusion — date to the mid-1980s through late 1990s and were filed by composite-materials originators including the University of Akron. These older filings, particularly around fiber-forming in-situ blends and extrusion of thermotropic polymers, are still the citation anchor for newer molding process claims. Anyone drafting new claims in this space should expect examiners to cite this cluster regardless of how recent the new filing is.
No — filings peaked at 24 in 2021, fell to 15 by 2022, and have continued declining toward single digits in the most recent tracked years. Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the very latest year is always undercounted, so some of that apparent drop will fill in later. Even allowing for that lag, the overall shape is a plateau rather than sustained growth, consistent with a claim space where the core molding routes are already staked out.
Based on receiving-office volume in this dataset, Japan (149 records) and Europe via the EPO (146) both exceed the United States (114), with China (48) and the PCT route (31) trailing. That distribution reflects where LCP resin producers and processors have historically concentrated filing activity, so a filing strategy — and any competitive clearance search — built only around US art will miss the majority of relevant prior art in this field.
US5260380A claims a self-reinforced polymer composite made by melt blending a matrix LCP with a fiber-forming second LCP under high-strain mixing conditions, then shaping that blend by injection molding or extrusion at a temperature between the two polymers' processing windows. Working below the fiber-forming polymer's minimum processing temperature is the specific mechanism that preserves the in-situ fibers in the finished part. Anyone using a two-LCP blend-and-shape approach with a similarly staged temperature window should review this patent's claim scope closely before finalising a process.
Relative to the dense core around polymer compositions (C08L) and plastics shaping (B29C), several adjacent branches show thinner filing density: in-situ fibrillated LCP blends specifically sized for thin-wall parts, multiaxially oriented LCP film aimed at high-frequency substrate applications, and laminate interlayer bonding where B32B overlaps the LCP corpus. These are not unclaimed, but they carry materially less filing density than the core, making them worth a closer novelty search before assuming the space is closed.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Liquid Crystal Polymer Molding Process in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole liquid crystal polymer molding process 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.