Metals & Metallurgy Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Concentration is modest. the ranked leader holds 252 records and the top 5 combined take just 6.3% of all 14,455 records in scope — this field is not locked up by a handful of firms.
- Filing has cooled from its peak. 2022 was the high point at 586 records, and filings from 2021 to 2024 fell 24%, though the two most recent years are still filling in as publications lag filing.
- Casting and extraction dominate claim space. B22D metal casting (18.6%) and C22B metal extraction & refining (15.2%) are the two densest IPC subclasses, well ahead of alloys, foundry moulding and powder metallurgy.
Filing growth compares 2021 (554 records) with 2024 (420) — 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 14,455 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the metals and metallurgy patent record shows
Metals and metallurgy patenting spans everything from blast furnace ironmaking to alloy design and corrosion control, and the search scope behind this page pulls together 14,455 published records filed against that breadth. The technology composition is not evenly spread: metal casting (B22D) and metal extraction & refining (C22B) account for the largest single shares of records, with alloys (C22C) close behind. No single assignee dominates the field — the leader holds 252 records against a total of 14,455, and the ranked leaders as a group take a modest slice of overall volume.
Filing activity rose through the late 2010s, peaked in 2022 at 586 records, and has since pulled back — filings fell 24% between 2021 and 2024. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any such trend understate real activity and should not be read as a slowdown in R&D itself.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
The underlying dataset covers 14,455 published records across major receiving offices, with the United States, Europe and Russia among the largest jurisdictions represented. The two views below show how filing volume has moved over time and how records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing volume, 2017–2026
Volume climbed from 489 records in 2017 to a peak of 586 in 2022, then declined to 420 by 2024 — a 24% drop over that three-year window. 2025 and 2026 figures (75 in the latest year) are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a real-time drop-off.
IPC subclass composition
Metal casting (B22D, 18.6%) and metal extraction & refining (C22B, 15.2%) are the two largest subclasses by record share, followed by alloys (C22C, 14.0%). Foundry moulding, iron production, ceramics/refractories, powder metallurgy and corrosion control each sit in the 4-6% range. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum to well over 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 14,455 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Metals & Metallurgy Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about metals & metallurgy patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative filing and the most-cited records
Process and Equipment for Blast Furnace Ironmaking Using Pure Oxygen and Gas (US20090095134A1)
The process for blast furnace ironmaking using pure oxygen and gas includes putting a mineral aggregate consisting of pellet, alkaline sinter, coke and solvent into the furnace from the furnace top, wherein each ton of iron is assigned with coke of 170-200 kg; blasting pure oxygen into the furnace, wherein each ton of molten iron is blasted with oxygen of 120-200 Nm3, and ejecting gas that is pressured and preheated by the ball type hot blast stove into the furnace so as to directly reducing pellet and iron-containing material, wherein the gas is preheated to a temperature ranging from 900°C to 1150°C.Filed by ZHOU, JIULE, published 2009-04-16 — an early example of pure-oxygen blast furnace claims that later filings in this space have had to work around.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160045841A1 | New and improved system for processing various chemicals and materials | 860 |
| 2 | US6579833B1 | A process for converting a metal carbide to carbon on the surface of the metal carbide by etching in halogens | 602 |
| 3 | US5224049A | Method, system and mold assembly for use in preparing a dental prosthesis | 452 |
| 4 | US20060229711A1 | Degradable implantable medical devices | 430 |
| 5 | US5859482A | Liquid cooled electric motor frame | 332 |
| 6 | US8574094B2 | Club head sets with varying characteristics and related methods | 321 |
| 7 | US8657700B2 | Club head sets with varying characteristics and related methods | 316 |
| 8 | US8753230B2 | Club head sets with varying characteristics | 310 |
| 9 | US5940674A | Three-dimensional product manufacture using masks | 304 |
| 10 | US20110160104A1 | Ceramic Particles With Controlled Pore and/or Microsphere Placement and/or Size and Method Of Making Same | 299 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings — treat them as a signal of impact, not of 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 numbers mean for scoping and freedom-to-operate
Three patterns stand out once volume, concentration and claim density are read together: the field is fragmented rather than cornered, casting and extraction carry the heaviest claim density, and recent-year figures need a lag adjustment before they are trusted.
No single filer controls the field
The leading assignee holds 252 of 14,455 records, and the top 5 combined account for just 6.3% of all records in scope. That leaves a long tail of entrants, including universities and regional metallurgy institutes, each holding a small slice of volume.
Casting and extraction are the most crowded subclasses
B22D (metal casting) and C22B (metal extraction & refining) together anchor the densest claim territory, with alloys (C22C) close behind. New filings in these three areas are more likely to run into prior art than filings in foundry moulding or corrosion control.
Volume has pulled back from its 2022 peak
Filings peaked at 586 records in 2022 and fell to 420 by 2024, a 24% decline over that span. The 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete because of the roughly 18-month gap between filing and publication, so the true current trajectory is not yet visible.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to metals & metallurgy patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee landscape and recent momentum
The assignee ranking covers 100 companies counted by records, from an industrial-scale leader with 252 records down through university and specialty-metallurgy filers holding single-digit counts. Momentum among the most active recent filers has been negative or flat across the board in the latest year.
Broad industrial filer, no single dominant technology
The top-ranked assignee's 252 records sit against a field of 14,455, meaning even the leader accounts for well under 2% of total volume — this is a fragmented field rather than a gated one.
A gradual drop-off, not a cliff
Volume steps down gradually from 146 records at fifth place to 91 at tenth, rather than falling off sharply after the leader — indicative of several comparably active filers rather than one clear runner-up.
Even active filers slowed in the latest year
Filers with meaningful recent-year volume, including a major aluminium producer and a technology holding company, show year-on-year declines of 40-75% in the latest year, with several long-standing filers recording zero filings in that year.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Novelis Inc. | 3 | -40% |
| Carbon Technology Holdings LLC | 2 | -75% |
| Kunming University of Science & Technology | 2 | -60% |
| Southwire Co LLC | 0 | — |
| General Electric Co | 0 | — |
| United Company RUSAL Engineering & Technology Center LLC | 0 | — |
| United Engineering Company | 0 | — |
| Ecolab USA Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a fragmented field with dense claim territory in casting and extraction, and thinner coverage in adjacent recycling and coating branches. The next step is usually to narrow the search to a specific claim family or competitor set.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on a specific process
General density figures do not tell you whether your specific casting or alloy process is blocked. Narrowing to exact claim language against the leading assignees' families is the next step.
Explore this in Eureka →Track momentum among the ranked leaders
Year-on-year declines among top filers may reflect publication lag rather than a real pullback. Monitoring filing activity as new publications land will clarify which filers are actually slowing.
Set up monitoring in Eureka →Frequently asked questions
The assignee ranking behind this dataset covers 100 companies, with the leader holding 252 of 14,455 total records. Filers include large industrial materials companies, aluminium and nonferrous metals producers, foundry and refractory specialists, and a number of university research institutes active in alloy design and metal extraction. No single filer holds a dominant share — the top 5 assignees combined account for only 6.3% of all records in scope, so due diligence should look beyond any one company's portfolio.
Filing volume rose through the late 2010s and peaked in 2022 at 586 records, then declined to 420 by 2024, a 24% drop over that three-year span. The most recent one to two years of data show much lower counts, but that reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than an actual collapse in activity. Treat any trend line's last one to two years as provisional until later publications catch up.
Metal casting (B22D) is the single largest subclass at 18.6% of the 14,455 records, followed by metal extraction and refining (C22B) at 15.2% and alloys (C22C) at 14.0%. Foundry moulding, iron production, ceramics and refractories, powder metallurgy and corrosion control each sit in the 4-6% range. Because a single patent record can carry multiple IPC classifications, these percentages sum to more than 100% of the record total, which is expected and not a data error.
The densest claim territory sits in casting, extraction and alloy design, so filings there face the heaviest prior art. Adjacent branches carry comparatively thinner coverage, including corrosion-resistant coatings tailored to recycled-content alloys, powder metallurgy feedstock recovered from scrap, refractory formulations suited to high-recycled-content furnace operation, and foundry mould reclamation processes. These are reasonable starting points for a novelty search rather than guaranteed clear space, and should be checked against the specific claim language of nearby filings.
US20090095134A1 describes a blast furnace ironmaking process that blasts pure oxygen and preheated gas into the furnace alongside a mineral aggregate of pellet, sinter, coke and solvent, specifying coke ratios per ton of iron, oxygen volumes per ton of molten iron, and a defined gas preheat temperature range. It matters as an early, specific articulation of pure-oxygen blast furnace operating parameters, which later filings addressing similar oxygen-enrichment or gas-preheat approaches in ironmaking need to design around. Anyone developing a comparable process should review its exact numeric ranges rather than assume a different plant configuration avoids it.
Research Metals & Metallurgy Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole metals & metallurgy 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.