Modular Construction Manufacturing Patents: Leaders & Gaps 2026
- Flat filing curve. activity peaked at 9 families in 2023 after a zero-filing year in 2022, with no sustained upward trend through the dataset.
- Panel and formwork classes dominate. E04B (building structures) and B28B (shaping clay/cement) together account for the large majority of the 48 families, while plastics-shaping and specialised-building classes barely register.
- No single assignee is currently active. every top assignee identified in the ranking, including the strongest co-filing cluster, shows zero filings in the latest year — ownership is historical, not momentum-driven.
Filing growth compares 2021 (7 records) with 2024 (3) — 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 48 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families filed against modular construction manufacturing process technology: factory module fabrication, automated prefab lines, panelized production and the manufacturing-process claims layered onto off-site construction. The underlying search combines title/abstract terms for prefabrication with IPC classes covering building structures (E04B), cement and clay shaping (B28B), structural components (E04C) and scaffolding/formwork (E04G), across 48 published families from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off.
Publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent year in any trend line understates real filing activity. Readers should treat the 2025-2026 figures as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 48 families: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the bulk of the claim language.
A flat, low-volume filing curve
Filings sat at zero in 2017 and again at the 2022 midpoint, with a single peak of 9 families in 2023. That shape does not show a technology in a growth phase — it shows sporadic filing bursts, likely tied to individual project cycles or regional prefab pushes, rather than a compounding wave of invention.
Concentration in building structures and cement shaping
E04B (building structures & elements) covers 35 of the 48 records and B28B (shaping clay & cement products) covers 23, meaning most families touch both the finished panel and the casting process that makes it. E04C, E04G and E02D form a mid-tier of structural, formwork and foundation claims, while C04B, E04H and B29C each carry only a handful of records — evidence of thin coverage rather than settled irrelevance.
Shares are the percentage of the 48 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Modular Construction Manufacturing Process with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about modular construction manufacturing process and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records other filings build on
WO2026148674A1 — wall panel / floor slab production process for prefabricated buildings
The filing describes a wall-panel and floor-slab production process for prefabricated buildings: rebar mesh processing, mould-table cleaning, mould assembly, rebar mesh placement, concrete pouring, surface levelling, pre-curing, mould removal, secondary curing, and inspection/storage. A framed pouring mould uses a silicone panel that can be flexibly configured to the target slab dimensions, with silicone-mould gripping tools for automated mould installation and removal keyed to pre-calibrated position parameters.Machine-assisted translation from the original Chinese-language filing.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US3751864A | Interstitial space frame system | 80 |
| 2 | US20070271870A1 | Manufacturing method for a prefabricated building panel | 29 |
| 3 | GB2019469A | Prefabricated Building Panel Structure | 21 |
| 4 | CN111037708A | 一种装配式建筑预制叠合楼板制备工艺 | 17 |
| 5 | US20100132271A1 | Constructive system | 14 |
| 6 | EP2738316A1 | Modular construction system | 12 |
| 7 | US3890748A | Structure of coordinated modular building construction | 12 |
| 8 | GB2346626A | A building panel | 11 |
| 9 | US20200048892A1 | Prefabricated building system and methods | 9 |
| 10 | WO2008068512A1 | Materials handling system | 7 |
Citation counts accumulate over time and favour older filings; a high count signals influence within this corpus, not current commercial relevance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 a filing decision
Three signals stand out once the trend and IPC data are read together: a stalled filing curve, a two-class concentration, and a receiving-office spread that favours mature construction markets over emerging ones.
Bursts, not a trend
The gap between a zero-filing midpoint year and a nine-family peak the following year points to project- or region-driven filing spikes rather than steady R&D investment. A single large prefab programme or a regional code change can move this dataset more than any underlying technology shift.
Panel and cast-process claims dominate
E04B and B28B together touch the majority of families, meaning most inventive effort has gone into the panel itself and the concrete/clay shaping process that produces it, not into the surrounding scaffolding, foundation or specialised-building integration.
US-anchored, then a scattered field
The United States leads as a receiving office by a clear margin, with China, EPO, Australia, Canada and WIPO/PCT trailing at similar levels. That spread suggests filers are protecting a home base in the US while taking selective international coverage rather than pursuing a single dominant secondary market.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to modular construction manufacturing process, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space — and who's moved on
Assignee activity in this dataset is historical rather than current: the strongest names in the ranking, including the tightest co-filing cluster, show no filings in the latest year. That makes this a landscape to check for blocking prior art, not one to watch for an active competitor.
An architecture-engineering-contractor triangle
Quattrocchi Kwok Architects, Gregory P Luth & Associates and Blach Construction Co. co-file with each other at equal, elevated strength compared to the rest of the dataset, consistent with a joint project team patenting a shared building system rather than three independent filers.
No currently active filer
Every assignee tracked in the recent-momentum view, from the architecture cluster to Habidite and Automated Architecture Ltd, recorded zero filings in the most recent year. Read this as a mature, quiet ownership picture rather than a race between active competitors.
A small, fragmented field
With 48 families spread across dozens of assignees and only a handful of co-filing relationships, ownership of modular manufacturing-process claims is fragmented rather than consolidated under one or two dominant portfolios.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| QUATTROCCHI KWOK ARCHITECTS | 0 | — |
| GREGORY P LUTH & ASSOCIATES INC | 0 | — |
| BLACH CONSTR CO | 0 | — |
| HABIDITE | 0 | — |
| AUTOMATED ARCHITECTURE LTD | 0 | — |
| Wang Guochao | 0 | — |
| SHERBAKOV DENNIS | 0 | — |
| SEABRICK SOCIETY | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio building, or competitive tracking.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on panel casting
Given the density in E04B and B28B, any new panel or mould design should be checked against the most-cited records in those classes before committing to a production-line design.
Explore with Patsnap EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
B29C, E04H and C04B carry only a handful of records each — worth a targeted search to confirm whether that reflects genuine white space or simply classification spread.
Explore with Patsnap EurekaWatch for a re-activation signal
Because every tracked assignee shows zero recent filings, a single new filing from any of the historical leaders would be a meaningful signal worth monitoring.
Explore with Patsnap EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
This dataset contains 48 published patent families filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off, drawn from a search combining modular/prefabricated construction terminology with manufacturing-process language and IPC classes for building structures, cement shaping, structural components and formwork. That figure reflects the specific search scope used here rather than every patent that touches modular construction broadly, since related structural or logistics claims filed under other classifications would sit outside this count. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true number of families filed in the last year or two is understated.
No, not on the evidence here. The filing trend is flat to declining: 2017 shows no filings, the 2022 midpoint also shows none, and the peak so far is 9 families in a single year, 2023. That pattern looks more like intermittent bursts tied to individual projects or regional building-code shifts than a compounding wave of R&D investment, so a claim of sustained growth would not be supported by this data.
Ownership in this dataset is fragmented across many assignees rather than concentrated in one or two dominant portfolios, with 48 families spread thinly and only four co-assignee pairs of any note. The strongest cluster links an architecture firm, an engineering firm and a construction company who co-file together, suggesting a joint project team rather than a single corporate leader. Every one of the top-ranked assignees, including that cluster, recorded zero filings in the most recent year, so current ranking reflects historical filing rather than active competition.
Relative to the dense E04B (building structures) and B28B (cement/clay shaping) classes, coverage is thin in plastics-based panel shaping, specialised-building integration, foundation-to-module interface detail, and ceramic or refractory formulations for panels. Each of those adjacent IPC branches carries only a handful of records in this dataset. That thinness can mean genuine white space for a first-mover claim, but it can also mean the relevant art is classified elsewhere, so it is worth a targeted search before assuming the space is open.
Because most of the citation weight and family density sits in panel structure (E04B) and the casting/shaping process behind it (B28B), a new filing that touches wall-panel or floor-slab casting should be checked against the highest-cited records in this landscape first, since those are the claims most likely to have broad, foundational language. Filings aimed at scaffolding, formwork or foundation interfaces face a smaller but still meaningful prior art base in E04G and E02D. The thinner classes — plastics shaping, specialised buildings, ceramics — carry lower collision risk but should still be searched directly rather than assumed clear.
Research Modular Construction Manufacturing Process in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole modular construction manufacturing 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.